Skip to content

Conversation

@JanKrb
Copy link

@JanKrb JanKrb commented Feb 16, 2022

Added "lof-own-page" and "lot-own-page" attributes just as the "toc-own-page".

@linux-lukas
Copy link

Would changes need to be made to automatically include the table of figures in the table of contents, @JanKrb ?

@JanKrb
Copy link
Author

JanKrb commented Jul 2, 2022

Would changes need to be made to automatically include the table of figures in the table of contents, @JanKrb ?

Just that I understand properly, you mean an option that there is no line break between the toc and the lof right?

@linux-lukas
Copy link

No. My point is whether the lof and lot can be automatically included in the table of contents. Currently this does not seem to be the case.

@JanKrb
Copy link
Author

JanKrb commented Jul 6, 2022

No. My point is whether the lof and lot can be automatically included in the table of contents. Currently this does not seem to be the case.

If I'm informed correctly, that's not possible, correct, but that would be content for a new pull request or feature request and doesn't really have anything to do with this topic.

@brenocss
Copy link

@Wandmalfarbe

@cagix
Copy link
Contributor

cagix commented Jan 17, 2023

I'm not the maintainer, but I'm wondering if one switch wouldn't be enough? Seems to me that you would either want all indexes each on their own page, or no extra page breaks at all? And wouldn't that also depend on the LaTeX class used, i.e. with "book" you would have a page break (automatically, right?) and with "report" rather not?

@JanKrb
Copy link
Author

JanKrb commented Jan 19, 2023

I oriented on the current solution to toc-own-page. For me a solution with two separate switches seems more convenient to me, since you might don't necessarily want all on separate pages. Maybe we'll get some more opinions on that?

@linux-lukas
Copy link

@Wandmalfarbe

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants