[OS X TeX] Two unanswered questions on StackExchange

[Alain Schremmer]

> On Nov 13, 2020, at 12:22 AM, Ross Moore <ross.moore at mq.edu.au> wrote:
> 
> Hi Alain,
> 
>> On 13 Nov 2020, at 4:04 pm, Alain Schremmer <schremmer.alain at freemathtexts.org <mailto:schremmer.alain at freemathtexts.org>> wrote:
>> 
>> About 10 days ago, I asked the following:
>> 
>> https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/569158/misnumbered-sections-in-starred-chapter-and-mishyperlinked-sections-in-main-matt <https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/Ae2iClx1OYU9xqzwcGPbP-?domain=tex.stackexchange.com>
>> 
>> Namely:
>> 
>>> While the MWE below compiles, there are two glitches whose causes I have not been able to figure out:
>>> 
>>> As can already be seen in the ToC, the sections in the Epilogue are numbered 3 and 4 instead of 1 and 2,
>>> In the ToC, if you hover near, for instance, Numbers, you will see “Go to page 9” while the Toc indicates page 1. In other words, the number of pages in the front matter (8) is being added to the page number in the hyperlink of the main matter items. The same obtains in the ChapterTocs.
>>> 
>> 
>>> (I didn’t think I should copy the MWE.)
> 
> This is perfectly normal.
> The hyperlink is using the “virtual page” of the PDF,
> whereas the printed number can easily be different, due to front-matter material
> using different numbering to the full document.
> 
> The pop-up is showing the name of the internal destination,
> which *must be unique* within the PDF.
> 
> It is quite hard to build the PDF so that it shows a message that is different from the internal unique destination name.
> Certainly this is not done as a matter of course.
> I’m not saying that it is impossible, but that the value of trying this is dubious,
> since it may not be understood by all PDF reader software.

Once again, Ross to the rescue of Alain!!!!!

1. I had noticed that “the number of pages in the front matter is being added to the page number of the toc to produce the page number in the pop-up” (I will edit the question with that wording.) But I was not at all aware that it would be so much harder for hyperref to keep track the way latex does. So, I thought it was my problem.

2. But a pdf on screen is much more appropriate for the kind of students I used to have as, for instance, while mathematicians will "go back" to ascertain the meaning of a word, these students are just not going to go to the index and then to where the term was defined and then back to where they needed it. They just won’t and that’s that. Onscreen, in the magnum opus, they will just have to click on the word and they might do it. But the toc glitch is going to upset them.

3. What about the numbering of the sections in the Epilogue? That's got to be the result of my dismal understanding of LaTeX.

4. In any case, thanks for explaning the first glitch. Now, I can go ask Oberdieck if he might see his way to make another “quick and dirty hack”.

—alain







-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://email.esm.psu.edu/pipermail/macosx-tex/attachments/20201113/2ff5510c/attachment.htm>