Text Formatting ⇒ Citations after Section Heading

[ForenDaddy]

i want du use cite after section{}.

example:

Code: Select all

\section{my headline} \cite{def_nam_conv} \cite{def_nam_mihai} \cite{def_nam_package}

problem is that the cite will be shown in the next line. but ist show up directly after my headline.
when i put it that way:

Code: Select all

\section{my headline \cite{def_nam_conv} \cite{def_nam_mihai} \cite{def_nam_package}}

the cite indexes will show correctly but as well in my table of contents what i don't what to.

question is how do i avoid a line brake after section oder how to avoid cites in table of contents.
or any other suggestions are welcome to make this look good.

[localghost]

Every basic LaTeX documentation suggests to use the short form for the heading.

Code: Select all

\section[ToC Entry]{Heading with Citaton \cite{key}}

Thorsten

[ForenDaddy]

thx a lot but there is no such thing as a basic latex documentation.
i have never come across something like this.

what exists are a bunch of keywords which are explained just on the surface.
a couple of "examples" where everybody uses different commands and packages to do the same. which makes it almost impossible to find the "correct" way.

[localghost]

thx a lot but there is no such thing as a basic latex documentation.
i have never come across something like this. […]

Really never [1]? If you are going to use LaTeX for a considerable time, think about acquiring a book for beginners.

[1] View topic: LaTeX Resources for Beginners

[ForenDaddy]

i have 2 books. they explain everything except what i am looking for.
and i am fed up with them.
i thought i would use latex more regularly but now i am not so sure anymore.
right now i have 40% latex coding time and the rest is the actual work.

my solution so far i just use code that i find and google my way through the internet. much faster than trying to find it the analog way in a book where you actually have to know how to find it.
after that and sometimes hours of frustration i use a forum.

[1] is as i mentioned before not a documentation.
every link is only a specialized view on a relatively small usage of latex.
the why, how and context is never explained in detail.

just to meantion it:
"A (Not So) Short Introduction to LaTeX2e" + "formatting information"
are dead and i can't write a post in that topic.

for example:
under "LaTeX for Complete Novices" you find the keyword "sections". what you showed me is not explained. the text in [] is explained as short title. an optional argument. you click on optional argument and it says nothing about the use in table of contents.

and that's how it goes on and on.
non explanation after non examples after missing cross reference in an normal latex "documentation".

[localghost]

i have 2 books. they explain everything except what i am looking for.
and i am fed up with them.
i thought i would use latex more regularly but now i am not so sure anymore.
right now i have 40% latex coding time and the rest is the actual work.[…]

I'm quite sure all these books describe the short form for the sectioning commands. Otherwise they are garbage. My books do so. But now you've got a link where to look.

[…] my solution so far i just use code that i find and google my way through the internet. much faster than trying to find it the analog way in a book where you actually have to know how to find it.
after that and sometimes hours of frustration i use a forum. […]

You should definitely ask in a forum first. Will save you much time.

[…][1] is as i mentioned before not a documentation.
every link is only a specialized view on a relatively small usage of latex.
the why, how and context is never explained in detail. […]

Wrong. There are comprehensive introductions to LaTeX for beginners. We would not list them otherwise.

[…] just to meantion it:
"A (Not So) Short Introduction to LaTeX2e" + "formatting information"
are dead and i can't write a post in that topic. […]

At the end of the post there is a link to a topic where you can post suggestions and other issues. But I will write a PM to my fellow moderator colleague and ask him to correct the links. For the present try this to get the »A (Not So) Short Introduction to LaTeX2e« in different languages.

[…] for example:
under "LaTeX for Complete Novices" you find the keyword "sections". what you showed me is not explained. the text in [] is explained as short title. an optional argument. you click on optional argument and it says nothing about the use in table of contents. […]

Right at the beginning of Section 5.3 the optional argument for sectioning commands is mentioned and explained as well. So I can't comprehend how you could miss that.

[…] and that's how it goes on and on.
non explanation after non examples after missing cross reference in an normal latex "documentation".

As I mentioned above, this is incomprehensible to me. Presumably there is something wrong in the way you are reading manuals.

[Stefan Kottwitz]

Hi,

just to meantion it:
"A (Not So) Short Introduction to LaTeX2e" + "formatting information"
are dead and i can't write a post in that topic.

the documentation has moved and I corrected those links and others. By the way, next to each of those links there was a corresponding link to CTAN, which was still working! I modified those links now to point to a CTAN folder instead of directly to a document, since the name or location might change.

Stefan

[ForenDaddy]

but still chapter 5.3 says nothing about table of contents. and i can't connect short title with table of contents. i don't have that much fantasy. it's just a short title for me. so what. otherwise tell me the line where it makes this connection to the toc clear.

problems with books is they are analog. means they have a certain point of view you have to follow. but i can't do that because i have limited time.
going through a bunch of information i don't need is a waste of time.
the things i need are written somewhere but i can't find them correctly because i can't search for them like on the internet. sometimes the context is different and i am looking in the wrong place for them. so a book is only good if you want to know everything of a topic and after you have read everything you start with your work.
maybe when you start from scratch it's ok but for me i just want to do something and want know the command and how i have to use it.
for example a reference guide implies you know the commands and just want to look up the command again to be sure. and books implie you are a reporter or writer and want to write something for papers. so everything is explained that way.
if you don't fit in these categories and i don't you have to go through a lot of unnecessary stuff.

but the most important piont is YOU know latex.
that means for you it is totally easy to find a specific information because you can recall the context and look it up fast.
for me it's not. i just know some commands. and most of the time i don't really know what they do because it is not explained in detail. it just says if you want to have it this way do it that way. copy & paste and that's it.
that's why most tutorials and guides are from a "i already know latex" view and are often missing tiny but important details that for those who know are totally easy and logical. for those who don't it's a closed book.

that's why i try to avoid using forums.
because first answer is "use google" or "Every basic LaTeX documentation suggests to use the short form for the heading.". yes IF you know where to look. that means you already need some knowledge i don't possess.

in the case of a section it may look like it's quite easy.
but i had another error i couldn't find anywhere.
i use bibtex. but in my document it didn't work. i had all the times [?] where i used \cite. a lot of people had this error message too. but slightly different. and i was doing everything exactly like in a dozent of tutorials and tried to adapt the solutions who weren't exactly my problem. i was going mad because it is totally nonsense why it's not working. so i tried a minimum example. still not working. till i found out by accident that a comment in my bibtex was the mistake.
a "%this is a comment" thing. what the f***. it's a comment. just ignore it dumb thing. i removed all comments and that's it. took me a whole weekend to find out.
because of my limited knowledge i couldn't consider a comment as an error.
why should i. in latex a comment is a comment. why should you change that in bibtex. not a helpful strategy.

this is not nagging about what you and the community does. it's just hard reality for me. i just wanted to tell you my point of view as a lost soul in an complicated latex universe.

so i say thank you for your support.
but i warn you in advance ...i will be back