Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Tagging of section numbers #1661

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Feb 14, 2025
Merged

Tagging of section numbers #1661

merged 8 commits into from
Feb 14, 2025

Conversation

u-fischer
Copy link
Member

  • Fix issue latex3/tagging-project#787
  • Change the tagging of section numbers to section-number role-mapped to Span as this gives a better reading experience:

image

image

Internal housekeeping

  • Ready to merge

Checklist of required changes before merge will be approved

  • Test file(s) added (updated)
  • Version and date string updated in changed source files
  • Relevant \changes entries in source included
  • Relevant changes.txt updated
  • Rollback provided (if necessary)?
  • ltnewsX.tex (and/or latexchanges.tex) updated

Copy link
Member

@davidcarlisle davidcarlisle left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

yes this gives a much better reading.
With Lbl, section headings are announced twice: a heading like "2 Introduction" read as "section heading level 1, 2; section heading level 1, introduction".
With Span it is read as "section heading level 1, 2 introduction"

Copy link
Member

@FrankMittelbach FrankMittelbach left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

approved with some queries and some textual suggestions

@@ -651,6 +662,7 @@
\MakeLinkTarget#1{#2}
}
}
\AddToNoCaseChangeList{\@hyp@section@target@n}
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just a thought: I don't know how long this no case change list already is, but wouldn't it be faster (and perhaps even better readable, if there is a general purpose \donotchangecase{...} with one argument that is used around material that should not change case?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do you mean \NoCaseChange?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I could instead put everywhere \NoCaseChange around the command if that is is faster, not sure.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

it probably is faster as it has no effect on MakeUppercase in general whereas adding to the list means that every use of MakeUppercase has to check for \@hyp@section@target@n

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If we need more speed, I an always rework how \AddToNoCaseChangeList works

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes I meant that, I wasn't sure that surived in the final implementation. My guess is that it would be faster and and also clearer codewise. what's your option @josephwright ?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If we need more speed, I an always rework how \AddToNoCaseChangeList works

maybe, but I don't see that it helps to have a long list if the task is always identical and understandably covered by a single command

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I switched to NoCaseChange

@u-fischer u-fischer merged commit 4aaf9a5 into develop Feb 14, 2025
86 checks passed
@u-fischer u-fischer deleted the UF-latex-lab-sec branch February 14, 2025 11:42
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