"Timwi" timwi@gmx.net wrote in message news:d8463i$3kp$2@sea.gmane.org...
Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 12:13:02AM +0100, Timwi wrote:
Phil Boswell wrote:
If you set up an article with sections like this, the auto-numbering gives an incorrect result: == 1 ==== 1.1 ==== 1.2 === 1.1 === 1.2
The auto-numbering assumes (quite reasonably) that the headings are nested correctly. Garbage in, garbage out.
Couldn't we just add a hack to detect such problems ?
And then do what? As you can see from the above, the software is *already* trying to do something reasonable given unreasonable input. Any system you can potentially propose, will have some seemingly nonsensical output for some pathological case.
Well, it's not actually reasonable in that the numbers are duplicated. So if someone were to be printing it out with the numbers on, say, or...wait...producing a hard-copy version for distribution off-line...
The section numbering would be cockeyed and the result would not look up to the standard we would hope people to expect.
I already proposed that the first instance of "1.1" ought to be "1.0.1" which would be the logical progression: you simply have to imagine a "hidden" "===" header in there.