You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Sample ITU documents (https://github.com/metanorma/mn-samples-itu) rarely use hierarchical object numbering out of the annexes and appendices.
It was noticed that annexes and appendices always number tables and figures in the following format: "Table x.y", "Figure x.y", where x is annex/appendix number, and y is table/figure number.
However, when hierarchical object number is used in regular clauses, dot is replaced with a dash, i.e. following format is used: "Table x-y", "Figure x-y". This is documented in https://www.metanorma.com/author/itu/authoring/ for :hierarchical-object-numbering:, which says: Use in complex documents, with multiple tables or figures, that need to be tracked against clauses for ease of lookup (so Figure 6-3, 6-4, instead of Figure 21, 22.) Note that equations in ITU are always numbered hierarchically.
At request (#192 (comment)), this ticket lists numbering formats used in all ITU sample documents, in order to check the conventions.
G.650.1
Numbering figures in regular clauses:
Numbering subfigures in regular clauses:
Numbering tables in annexes:
Numbering figures in appendices:
A.8
Numbering figures in regular clauses:
H.782
Numbering tables in regular clauses:
Numbering figures in regular clauses:
Numbering figures in annexes:
P.1203
Numbering tables in regular clauses:
Numbering figures in regular clauses:
Y.3507
Numbering figures in regular clauses:
Numbering tables in appendices:
Other document types:
Z.100 (:doctype: recommendation-annex)
Numbering figures in regular clauses (though this document is annex itself...):
T-RES T.1 (:doctype: resolution)
Numbering figures in regular clauses:
T-Editing Guidelines (not a real resolution)
Numbering tables in regular clauses:
Numbering figures in regular clauses:
Numbering figures in annexes:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Sample ITU documents (https://github.com/metanorma/mn-samples-itu) rarely use hierarchical object numbering out of the annexes and appendices.
It was noticed that annexes and appendices always number tables and figures in the following format: "Table x.y", "Figure x.y", where x is annex/appendix number, and y is table/figure number.
However, when hierarchical object number is used in regular clauses, dot is replaced with a dash, i.e. following format is used: "Table x-y", "Figure x-y". This is documented in https://www.metanorma.com/author/itu/authoring/ for
:hierarchical-object-numbering:
, which says:Use in complex documents, with multiple tables or figures, that need to be tracked against clauses for ease of lookup (so Figure 6-3, 6-4, instead of Figure 21, 22.) Note that equations in ITU are always numbered hierarchically.
At request (#192 (comment)), this ticket lists numbering formats used in all ITU sample documents, in order to check the conventions.
G.650.1
Numbering figures in regular clauses:
Numbering subfigures in regular clauses:
Numbering tables in annexes:
Numbering figures in appendices:
A.8
Numbering figures in regular clauses:
H.782
Numbering tables in regular clauses:
Numbering figures in regular clauses:
Numbering figures in annexes:
P.1203
Numbering tables in regular clauses:
Numbering figures in regular clauses:
Y.3507
Numbering figures in regular clauses:
Numbering tables in appendices:
Other document types:
Z.100 (
:doctype: recommendation-annex
)Numbering figures in regular clauses (though this document is annex itself...):
T-RES T.1 (
:doctype: resolution
)Numbering figures in regular clauses:
T-Editing Guidelines (not a real resolution)
Numbering tables in regular clauses:
Numbering figures in regular clauses:
Numbering figures in annexes:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: