Per Einar Ellefsen wrote: > > At 12:06 15.04.2002, allan wrote: > >hi > > > >having looked at the various solutions/suggestions i suggest > >this, if we can do it: > > > >see attached gif. > > > > > >* the previous "Top"-image is now called "Toc" and links to > >the relevant section in the table of contents > >* the "Top" image is now blue [it could be vice versa of > >course] and links of course to the top. > >* the numbers link upwards to parents and parents parents > >etc etc.. > >* the headers h* are all the same size and font specs [this > >is only because it is very clear how deep you are -> so no > >point in eleborating further on the sizes] > > I would still be inclined to have a size difference, as it's what is "normal".
ok, maybe i'm looking at it the wrong way. so please correct me if i am wrong. as it is now i have seen up to 4 nested level, spanning from h1, h2, h3, h4. can we assure that we wont have one ore more further levels? if so, i can easily live with the h1-h4 solution. but what if we have, say two more levels. would we then go from h1-h6? and what relative sizes should those then be? it's not that i am against this, i just fail to see any real gain [maybe h1=big, h>1=less big] > >+ there is no link/hovering on the actual header-title. i > >think a link on an actual header is a crime :) > > > >+ but we maintain navigation to parents while maintaining > >exact navigation to the table of contents. > > +1 ./allan --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
