Suppose I have a (documentclass-)article with several sections and one appendix. Some sections have several subsections and within them, subsubsection. Now, the appendix is about the same size and scope as a single subsection, not an entire section. But - it is not an appendix-to-a-single-section.

I like that it's listed as a section on the table of contents. I don't even mind very much that it's set in the font size of a whole section. But - I do want its subdivisions to be the equivalent of subsubsections. Unfortunately, if I actually use subsubsections, it's as though I'm in "subsection 0" - especially with respect to numbering: The ToC will have "A.0.1", "A.0.2" etc. - and the subsubsections themselves will have those numbers too. And if I use subsections, I'm giving too much "importance" to a short piece of text.

So, my simpler question is: Is there a not-super-ugly way of getting "A.1", "A.2" numbers of for subsubsections in my appendix? Or perhaps getting subsections in the appendix to be typeset like subsubsections in the main body of the paper?

And a more complicated question: Has there been any writing/package/documentclass work on how to handle this issue more methodically? Not just as it regards numbering and font size?

  • If you have only one section, why bother with that section at all? Why not promote the subsections to sections etc? If you find the headings too large that way, you can use \usepackage[small]{titlesec} to reduce the font size. – Michael Palmer Sep 16 '17 at 23:16
  • @MichaelPalmer: That was an artifact in my example. See edit. – einpoklum Sep 17 '17 at 10:29
  • OK. I'm still not clear why the divisions in the appendix should be subsubsections rather than subsections. Is it just the size of the headings? – Michael Palmer Sep 17 '17 at 12:15

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.