On Wed, Mar 12 2008 14:01:48 +0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > | FWIW, I think that scheme works okay in the CSS2 index at > | http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-CSS2/indexlist.html > > Bleh. I think it looks ridiculous. But if the world disagrees with me, > I won't stand in its way. I probably will give the "number all index > terms sequentially" format a whirl when I have a chance.
If you use the index frequently *and* the document is updated frequently, isn't the "number all index terms sequentially" format the worst of both worlds? Numbering from 1 each time or numbering all terms sequentially both produce numbers that are meaningless (except as indications of relative position within the document). If you use the index frequently and all terms are numbered sequentially, a minor edit adding an index term near the start of the document would renumber all following index terms and render them both meaningless and unrecognisable. An advantage of both the "section title" format and the "start at 1" format is that adding an index term affects either none or at most one of the existing index entries. Regards, Tony Graham. ====================================================================== [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.menteithconsulting.com Menteith Consulting Ltd Registered in Ireland - No. 428599 Registered Office: 13 Kelly's Bay Beach, Skerries, Co. Dublin, Ireland ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Menteith Consulting -- Understanding how markup works ====================================================================== --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
