3

Context

I'm doing a template for a Master Thesis based on the report class and want to achieve the following characteristics:

  • a) Tikz-based titles, headers and/or footers
  • b) IEEE-alphanumeric style global bibliography, \citeauthor and \citeyear citation options, and partial references lists in some chapters
  • c) Customized Table Of Contents, List Of Figures, List Of Tables, List Of Algorithms and List of Symbols/acronyms; and partial TOCs, LOFs, LOTs, LOAs and LOSs in some chapters

NOTE: 'some chapters' may be chapters either in the body of the report or after \appendix

I have used fancyhdr + natbib + bibunits + minitoc for a quite long time, and I'm changing to titlesec + biblatex + minitoc. Thanks to some very valuable suggestions in this site [1] [2] [3] I've achieved characteristics a) and b).

Alternatives to minitoc

In the documentation of minitoc, it is said to be incompatible with titlesec:

We test the presence of the titlesec package, and emit a warning, because this package is incompatible with minitocs

All the auxuliary files (*.mtc?, *.mlf?, *.mlt?...) are correctly generated, but due to the usage of \chapter*{} and \section*{} some of the mini lists are shown in the wrong chapter. I've tried using \addstarredchapter{} and \adjustptc, and managed to get correctly placed mini lists in all the chapters before the \appendix. It seemed to me that I had to make many not so clear changes to the template in order to get it working, and some more 'cheats' are still needed. I think I could hook \minitoc, but it doesn't look to be the best idea to me.

So, since minitoc is currently unmaintained (as commented by @Johannes_B) I've been looking for alternatives and found tocloft, titletoc and etoc. I would pick etoc, because it is the newest one. But both tocloft and titletoc are closely related to titlesec, which I'm actually using.

Which one would you recommend to show partial TOCs, LOFs and LOTs in some of the chapters of a report, besides customizing their style?

Community
  • 1
umarcor
  • 1,454
  • I haven't checked, but i think minitoc handles starred chapter/sections differently. There should be more information in the manual (section 2.30). – Johannes_B Sep 19 '14 at 18:31
  • 1
    You are asking a lot of questions here. Hard to cover them all in an answer. – Johannes_B Sep 19 '14 at 18:34
  • Package minitoc is currently (sadly) unmaintained, so i would go with etoc. – Johannes_B Sep 19 '14 at 18:36
  • I'll try to rewrite it and make it clear. – umarcor Sep 19 '14 at 18:36
  • I just finished editing the question. Hope it's easier to answer now. Thanks for your suggestion about using etoc. – umarcor Sep 19 '14 at 19:03
  • You can give a try at titletoc, from the titlesec family. – Bernard Sep 19 '14 at 19:50
  • 1
    I think @Johannes_B's concern was not so much that the questions weren't clear but that there may be too many of them for a single question. You may find you get better and quicker answers if you stick to one question per question. That way, you don't need to have somebody who can answer all of them happen along. – cfr Sep 19 '14 at 21:31
  • I think glossaries can handle acronyms, too. I've certainly used glossaries with etoc for partial tocs. (Not exactly mini tocs - more like cumulative tocs - but I think mini tocs are probably more straightforward, if anything.) – cfr Sep 19 '14 at 21:33
  • I've removed the last part to keep it simpler. On choosing between etoc and titletoc (since those are the ones you mentioned), I read here that etoc only handles Tables of Contents (nor LOFs, neither LOTs). If that is still true, I think I should pick 'titletoc'. – umarcor Sep 19 '14 at 21:55
  • @U.Martinez-Corral yes etoc does not handle, as of its current version 1.07l [2014/04/22], neither LOFs nor LOTs but only TOCs. –  Dec 20 '14 at 14:25

0 Answers0