Thomas, Nicholas,

I realise I did not make myself clear in my original note with regard to 
bullets etc. I regard the exact numbering type (bullets, roman, decimal, 
etc.) as a purely display issue. The internal numbering and depth structures 
do not change between

a.
b.
b.1.
b.2.
c.

and

o
o
 1.
 2.
o

Also, I suggest that there is never a reason to use a manual override for 
heading numbers except for the first paragraph in a file This should be 
sufficient to support the chapter-per-file style of book writing without 
risk of obscure errors. However, I'm open to persuasion on this.

Now, I hope that my original description make more sense. Using my 
terminology, the example Thomas gave looks like this:

> 1.1 Header          - heading numbered, depth = 1
>                             - several unnumbered
> a list item            - list numbered, depth = 0, display = lowercase
> b list item            - ditto
> c list item            - ditto
>   1 list2 item        - list numbered, depth = 1, display = decimal
>   2 list2 item        - ditto
> d list item            - list numbered, depth = 0, display = lowercase
>   1 list3 item        - list numbered, depth = 1, display = decimal
>   2 list3 item        - ditto
>     2.1 list4 item   - list numbered, depth = 1, display = decimal
>     2.2 list4 item   - ditto
> e list item            - list numbered, depth = 0, display =lowercase
>
> 1.2 Header         - heading numbered, depth = 1

The algorithms I provided will get the above numbering correctly, I think.

Thomas is probably right in that the depth for heading numbered paragraphs 
can be inferred from the style. We don't have this for lists as Thomas 
observes - perhaps I should fix that first? I have to tread a bit carefully 
to keep backwards compatibility for old list styles.

> Just use numbers as I did in my example above. These numbers then reflect
> the amount of digits used. So the 2.1 in my example above should have depth
> 2.

Well, the current code is zero-based, but this is easy to change.

> We don't have a Heading numbering anymore (IMO), this is just another flow.
>
> > Any preceeding unnumbered paragraph is skipped as if it did not exist.
>
> No, in most document people make lists that simply count from 1 to n, and
> start a new list after a number of unnumbered paragraphs. So doing what you
> suggest here breaks the normal usage of a lot of users.

No, the presence of  the unnumbered paragraph (using my terminiology) is what 
allows your "flows" to be deduced. I believe what I suggested will support 
your example.

I think we are actually in quite good agreement in concept (the terminology 
is a bit different), so I will look to code up the design I had in mind. We 
can always rework that if it does not work out in practice.

Thanks, Shaheed
_______________________________________________
Koffice-devel mailing list
Koffice-devel@master.kde.org
http://master.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/koffice-devel