Not signed in

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

Site Tag Cloud

Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome to nForum
If you want to take part in these discussions either sign in now (if you have an account), apply for one now (if you don't).

title trick

Bottom of Page

1 to 12 of 12

- CommentRowNumber1.
- CommentAuthorTobyBartels
- CommentTimeNov 2nd 2009
- PermaLink
Author: TobyBartels
Format: MarkdownIf you want a title that's different from the official one, you can kind of make it happen using this trick with the table of contents: # Desired title * tic { :toc} ## First header etc. It's not ideal, because the formatted title doesn't go at the top, and people who don't like `<h2>` as the basic header won't like it. But it's something, and it gets rid of those unnecessary ‘Contents’ in the contents, too. See an example at [[accessible (infinity,1)-category]].
If you want a title that's different from the official one, you can kind of make it happen using this trick with the table of contents:
```
# Desired title
* tic
{ :toc}

## First header
```
etc.

It's not ideal, because the formatted title doesn't go at the top, and people who don't like <h2> as the basic header won't like it. But it's something, and it gets rid of those unnecessary ‘Contents’ in the contents, too.

See an example at accessible (infinity,1)-category.
- CommentRowNumber2.
- CommentAuthorUrs
- CommentTimeNov 2nd 2009
- PermaLink
Author: Urs
Format: TextMaybe I am the only one who expressed preference for not doing it that way. I am prepared to be outvoted. But is it clear that the line "Contents" is undesireable? Usually, in articles, we do have a title for the table of contents. Also on Wikipedia the table of contents on pages is titled "Contents".
Maybe I am the only one who expressed preference for not doing it that way. I am prepared to be outvoted.

But is it clear that the line "Contents" is undesireable?

Usually, in articles, we do have a title for the table of contents. Also on Wikipedia the table of contents on pages is titled "Contents".
- CommentRowNumber3.
- CommentAuthorMike Shulman
- CommentTimeNov 2nd 2009
- PermaLink
Author: Mike Shulman
Format: MarkdownI generally prefer *not* to have a title for the TOC; it seems redundant to me (it's obvious what the TOC is). But I don't really have much of a preference.

I generally prefer not to have a title for the TOC; it seems redundant to me (it's obvious what the TOC is). But I don't really have much of a preference.
- CommentRowNumber4.
- CommentAuthorUrs
- CommentTimeNov 2nd 2009
- PermaLink
Author: Urs
Format: TextI don't really have much of a preference either, but just for the sake of the argument I notice that Toby's suggestion is no less redundant: it repeats the title! maybe what we really want is that the software recognizes actively what we mean to be a table of contents and applies some special formatting to it. Wikipedia titles its tocs with "Contents" and nobody complains, possibly because the font it uses is small font, not a huge one.
I don't really have much of a preference either, but just for the sake of the argument I notice that Toby's suggestion is no less redundant: it repeats the title!

maybe what we really want is that the software recognizes actively what we mean to be a table of contents and applies some special formatting to it. Wikipedia titles its tocs with "Contents" and nobody complains, possibly because the font it uses is small font, not a huge one.
- CommentRowNumber5.
- CommentAuthorTobyBartels
- CommentTimeNov 2nd 2009
- PermaLink
Author: TobyBartels
Format: MarkdownWhat *really* bugs me about the contents as Urs does them is that the contents are listed in the contents! This is the result of making `<h1>` the basic header. If (as Mike has been doing, I think?, or maybe it was just me) you make `<h2>` the basic header and put ‘Contents’ where I pit ‘Accessible <latex>(\infty,1)</latex>-categories’, then you get a header for the contents that is not itself listed in the contents. (But that header looks particularly ugly, since it's actually larger than the other headers!) None of this makes much difference in the end, but I wanted people to know about this possibility, which might please Eric for its titling possibilities as well. (I made sure to use a capitalised plural title with symbols as my example.)

What really bugs me about the contents as Urs does them is that the contents are listed in the contents! This is the result of making <h1> the basic header. If (as Mike has been doing, I think?, or maybe it was just me) you make <h2> the basic header and put ‘Contents’ where I pit ‘Accessible $(\infty,1)$ -categories’, then you get a header for the contents that is not itself listed in the contents. (But that header looks particularly ugly, since it's actually larger than the other headers!)

None of this makes much difference in the end, but I wanted people to know about this possibility, which might please Eric for its titling possibilities as well. (I made sure to use a capitalised plural title with symbols as my example.)
- CommentRowNumber6.
- CommentAuthorEric
- CommentTimeNov 5th 2009
- PermaLink
Author: Eric
Format: MarkdownFor the record, I prefer "Contents" to be the name of Contents :) I suggest waiting to change things until Jacques implements the "feature request" allowing us to specify page titles different than the link name. It shouldn't be difficult to tweak .toc so that it does not include "Contents" as a bullet item. I've just been using ## and it gets things right.

For the record, I prefer "Contents" to be the name of Contents :)

I suggest waiting to change things until Jacques implements the "feature request" allowing us to specify page titles different than the link name. It shouldn't be difficult to tweak .toc so that it does not include "Contents" as a bullet item. I've just been using ## and it gets things right.
- CommentRowNumber7.
- CommentAuthorTobyBartels
- CommentTimeNov 5th 2009
- PermaLink
Author: TobyBartels
Format: MarkdownYes, all `##` and no `#` makes the contents a non-self-referential list. But Urs has been enjoying my version lately. Has Jacques said that he'll implement titling soon?

Yes, all ## and no # makes the contents a non-self-referential list.

But Urs has been enjoying my version lately. Has Jacques said that he'll implement titling soon?
- CommentRowNumber8.
- CommentAuthorEric
- CommentTimeNov 5th 2009
- PermaLink
Author: Eric
Format: MarkdownWe've been working with redirects for a while now. The idea seems pretty solid. Now that we are accustomed to it, do we think that feature is still a priority? I would say "yes". If enough of us agree it is a priority, we can make a formal request so he is aware of it. While we're at it, we might ask him to make it so that "Linked from" also recognizes redirects. For example, [[cone morphism]] was an orphan because I created it using [[cone morphism|cone function]] and now [[cone morphism]] does not have a "Linked from" for the page where I created the link from.

We've been working with redirects for a while now. The idea seems pretty solid. Now that we are accustomed to it, do we think that feature is still a priority? I would say "yes". If enough of us agree it is a priority, we can make a formal request so he is aware of it.

While we're at it, we might ask him to make it so that "Linked from" also recognizes redirects. For example, cone morphism was an orphan because I created it using cone function and now cone morphism does not have a "Linked from" for the page where I created the link from.
- CommentRowNumber9.
- CommentAuthorUrs
- CommentTimeNov 5th 2009
- (edited Nov 5th 2009)
- PermaLink
Author: Urs
Format: Markdown<blockquote> But Urs has been enjoying my version lately. </blockquote> Yes, I started to like it. It made me reinforce also a new formatting pattern (currently I use that mostly on my personal web) where - the entry may _start_ with a standout box that gives some contextual information such as "this is a sub-entry of xyz" or "this is about the article of abc", or "this is about the general notion of ...". - _then_ comes the Toby-style toc - and then finally the content itself. For instance that seems to work well at [[A Survey of Elliptic Cohomology - the derived moduli stack of derived elliptic curves]] (or so it seems to me, let me know if you disagree)
This comment is invalid XHTML+MathML+SVG; displaying source. <div> <blockquote> But Urs has been enjoying my version lately. </blockquote> <p>Yes, I started to like it. It made me reinforce also a new formatting pattern (currently I use that mostly on my personal web) where</p> <ul> <li><p>the entry may <em>start</em> with a standout box that gives some contextual information such as "this is a sub-entry of xyz" or "this is about the article of abc", or "this is about the general notion of ...".</p></li> <li><p><em>then</em> comes the Toby-style toc</p></li> <li><p>and then finally the content itself.</p></li> </ul> <p>For instance that seems to work well at <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/A+Survey+of+Elliptic+Cohomology+-+the+derived+moduli+stack+of+derived+elliptic+curves">A Survey of Elliptic Cohomology - the derived moduli stack of derived elliptic curves</a></p> <p>(or so it seems to me, let me know if you disagree)</p> </div>
- CommentRowNumber10.
- CommentAuthorEric
- CommentTimeNov 5th 2009
- PermaLink
Author: Eric
Format: MarkdownHmm... why do you have many sections NOT capitalized? It looks like a "mistake", but it occurs so frequently that I think it is probably intentional. In my opinion, it does not look very good. It's just my opinion, but on that "Survey" page, I still think "Contents" would look better. After all, that's what it is. Contents. I also think "Contents" would look better at the very top of the page. A typical "Contents" looks something like <blockquote> Contents <ul> <li>Preface</li> <li>Introduction</li> <li>Blah</li> <li>Blah</li> </ul> </blockquote> I don't see why we need to change something that is pretty standard. That said, you are free to do whatever you want. It is a wiki after all :) I would hesitate before going through other pages and making wholesale changes though. It does get tiring talking about formatting all the time doesn't it?! :)
This comment is invalid XHTML+MathML+SVG; displaying source. <div> <p>Hmm... why do you have many sections NOT capitalized? It looks like a "mistake", but it occurs so frequently that I think it is probably intentional. In my opinion, it does not look very good.</p> <p>It's just my opinion, but on that "Survey" page, I still think "Contents" would look better. After all, that's what it is. Contents. I also think "Contents" would look better at the very top of the page. A typical "Contents" looks something like</p> <blockquote> Contents <ul> <li>Preface</li> <li>Introduction</li> <li>Blah</li> <li>Blah</li> </ul> </blockquote> <p>I don't see why we need to change something that is pretty standard.</p> <p>That said, you are free to do whatever you want. It is a wiki after all :) I would hesitate before going through other pages and making wholesale changes though.</p> <p>It does get tiring talking about formatting all the time doesn't it?! :)</p> </div>
- CommentRowNumber11.
- CommentAuthorUrs
- CommentTimeNov 5th 2009
- PermaLink
Author: Urs
Format: MarkdownYou are right about the capitaization. I was wondering myself why my fingers did it the way they did. And otherwise, yes, I guess everything has its pros and cons.

You are right about the capitaization. I was wondering myself why my fingers did it the way they did.

And otherwise, yes, I guess everything has its pros and cons.
- CommentRowNumber12.
- CommentAuthorTobyBartels
- CommentTimeNov 5th 2009
- PermaLink
Author: TobyBartels
Format: MarkdownI always thought that Urs's lowercase headers were a Germanism. That is, Urs knows that they should be capitalised in English, but they're not in German, so often he forgets. But maybe it's just Urs! (^_^) Eric's contents style is what I used to do, until I discovered this one. I like it better than Urs's previous method, but I still like mine best of all. (^_^) I would not go around changing any other contents style to one that I like better. But sometimes I'm motivated to create contents out of fear that Urs might do it first; surely that's only a good thing!

I always thought that Urs's lowercase headers were a Germanism. That is, Urs knows that they should be capitalised in English, but they're not in German, so often he forgets. But maybe it's just Urs! (^_^)

Eric's contents style is what I used to do, until I discovered this one. I like it better than Urs's previous method, but I still like mine best of all. (^_^)

I would not go around changing any other contents style to one that I like better. But sometimes I'm motivated to create contents out of fear that Urs might do it first; surely that's only a good thing!

1 to 12 of 12

nForum

Discussion Feed

Not signed in

Site Tag Cloud

Atrium > Mathematics, Physics & Philosophy: Contents/title trick