+1

I agree, I really miss this feature from other wikis.
It saves a great amount of time.

(No comment was entered for this change.)

(No comment was entered for this change.)

+1
It could be useful also for the Home Page.

+1

+1

See also  issue #288  regarding automatic heading numbering.

+1

+1

Any word on if/when this will be fixed?

It says Milestone-2008, don't hold your breath!

Where can we sign up to help developing? :)

True... :)
I don't want to be rude but a lot of enhancement proposals which are starred by a lot
of users are stagnant from the beginning of year 2007. This is not encouraging... :-\

Hey guys.  Thanks for your enthusiasm. We are definitely working on the most-starred
issues first, and this one is in the top 10.  Stay tuned for more user-visible
functionality over the next several weeks. 

Awesome Jason... Thanks for the notice. I'm definetly looking forward to some "action" :)

+1

+1

+5

+1

+1

help.....................

You can create a table of contents manually using internal links:

  * [ApiDocumentation#Introduction Introduction]
  * [ApiDocumentation#Usage Usage]
  * [ApiDocumentation#Input_Options Input Options]

See for example:

http://code.google.com/p/nvidia-texture-tools/wiki/ApiDocumentation

Thanks for the tip! :)
AFAIR anchors were not supported some time ago.

One note about anchors as it was not clear from your comment: it is not necessary to
add them manually, they are created by substitution of spaces in title with
underscores, like in example above:
ApiDocumentation#Input_Options is link to subsection called "Input Options".

@jrobbins:  Any update on when this might be available?  It seems a little odd that
the  most-starred issue in this project has yet to be "accepted", even though it's
been open for over a year.

You did say, "stay tuned" back in October, after all... :)

@castano: I think it's an issue of the anchor system, but AFAICS this don't work if
the title text contains '?', '.', ',', '!'. It's quite bad, because in a FAQ, for
example, you just can't avoid a '?'.

The thing is, a title like

'Anyone here?'

gets anchored with

<a id="Anyone_here?"/>

but the following:

[FAQ#Anyone_here? Anyone here?]

isn't a valid wiki link. Am I getting something wrong?

broofa: We are certainly working on addressing the highly starred issues.  We are
working on this one now, but we have a lot of user-visible and behind-the-scenes work
going on in parallel so each takes time.  And, we are addressing this one as part of
a larger wiki upgrade that will allow us to resolve many wiki enhancement requests. 

Non-latin Unicode characters in the anchor part don't work also.

@germano.rizzo, justin.forest, and krzysztof.lichota (et al):

Bugs with the anchor system are not w/in the scope of this issue.  I've created  issue
#721  to address the problems that have been reported here.  Please continue any
related discussion over there (since comments here are email'ed to the 80+ people who
have starred this issue... many of whom, like me, probably don't consider Castano's
solution to be a viable workaround.)

Thanks.

Are there some news?

(No comment was entered for this change.)

+1

+1

Agree

+!

Any update on this?

+1

We need this for our project!

+1

+1

+1

+1

+1

_Please_ stop these mindless   +1  comments
Doesn't serve any purpose other than spamming our mailbox

Just "star" the issue, and that serves the purpose better.

+1 to harshad.rj!

No, but really, I get this my e-mail. Starring is definitely better for my inbox. Thanks.

Yeah everybody, let's write full of sense +1's to #43 instead of mindless plain +1's.

Instead of spamming this list with more anti-"+1" comments, please star  Issue #677  ,
'Discourage "+1" comments.' to let Google know this is a problem that needs to be
addressed.  Thanks.

Adding +1 comments is the only choice users have to ask google staff to put more
interest on working on requests they opened since a long time.
I can understand that receiving mail notifications for nothing but "+1" messages
could be frustrating but also seeing so few progress concerning this service is
frustrating.

As for this same issue, it is opened since Jan 28 2007 and it's the most starred one
but it seems that no visible progresses have been made ever since.

It was meant to be finished on the 2nd quarter of this year, if I'm not mistaken, but
it's been quite a while and this is a very important feature. I'm still hoping it
doesn't get postponed. We're already in the 2nd quarter of 2008 and 1 month away from
the 3rd quarter.

My comment was meant to a bit of a joke, but a sensible one. Anyone browsing issues
will likely scroll through the most starred ones for relevance first (I know I do, at
least). Perhaps we should address /why/ people are posting +1 endlessly, which as
gnewsg2 mentioned, is a lack of visible progress.

Genosonic is right that it is an important issue to everyone, and perhaps a test case
for what users do when left in the dark about progress by the devs. Perhaps dropping
in on high-volume (heavily starred?) issues periodically with updates would help with
the mindless +1 traffic.

"what users do when left in the dark about progress by the devs"

What about moving to a Free-software solution?  Then you will never be left in the
dark, you can go on and fix it yourself.

(No comment was entered for this change.)

rodolfo.borges: see /p/longhouse/

Quotting broofa: One more vote for TableOfContents support.

Also, the ability to link to sections (headings) within a document would be very
useful - I really would like this feature. 

vote +1;

I also want this feature. Like a `TableOfContents(int level)` is very 
useful/desirable.

What is the current status?

A table of contents on a page is a core requirement for a Wiki.  This 
implementation, after just a few days, seems to be like procurring a car only to 
find out it has no brakes.  For some reason, I PRESUMED that brakes were included so 
never explicitly asked the question before setting up my open source project at 
Google Code.

I would also like to see the feature but until the developers get around to it here
is a Perl script that I use from my project to generate a table of contents. Maybe it
can be useful to someone else: 
http://fredreh.wordpress.com/my-projects/gtoc/
  

@MarvinToll: While I would like to have a table of content as well, I would like to
point out that the original wiki still doesn't have them, so saying that they are a
"core requirement" might be a bit much...

Just like multi-level undo on a text editor.

It's not a "core requirement", but it is a expected feature for a decent text editor.

It says Milestone-2008, don't hold your breath!

A table of contents can be added to a page with the following syntax:

{{{
<wiki:toc/>
}}}

You can also limit the header depth included in the table of contents by adding a
max_depth parameter:

{{{
<wiki:toc max_depth="1"/>
}}}

We will be updating documentation to cover this feature. 

Don't you mean just:

<wiki:toc/>

without the {{{}}}?

It's clearly without the {{{}}}. Wow, google, what happened? Nobody here really 
expects you to fix the most starred issues anymore.

ningerso put the {{{}}} because he thought it would be wikified and turned into code
so it looks a little better. Unfortunately wiki formatting isn't supported in comments.

Where's the love?  Even though it's taken a seemingly inordinate amount of time to
get this feature implemented, I would like to say *thank you!* ... once more ...
THANK YOU!  I'm certain this will improve the overall quality of documentation in
project wikis.  So, thank you!

Thank you for implementing this.

Just a note, in case you were unaware of this quirk: I had a section title with
markup in it, like

===Foo `bar`===

The `bar` was stripped out of the table of contents and showed as just Foo

After a quick test, it looks like if there are two identical titles at different 
levels they both correctly show up in the TOC, but they both refer to the same one.

Thanks for fixing this, anyway.

Thanks! Great feature!

Great to see this after the long wait! Kudos, and thanks!

Re: comment 66: I believe Wikipedia has the same problem, at least if you manually
make a link to an anchor.

Wooohooo!  Thank you.

Thank you!

...and a small bug for you:

Camel-noted words seem to create some problem. See 
[http://code.google.com/p/smslib/wiki/SMSServer_Gateways here].

<wiki:toc> suddenly stopped working for me. No toc shown any more. Did anyone else
notice this? Can anyone help?

It's <wiki:toc/> with the ending slash.

Yes, that's what I actually have (typo was only in my message), e.g., here:
http://code.google.com/p/pure-lang/wiki/Addons (svn here:
http://code.google.com/p/pure-lang/source/browse/wiki/Addons.wiki)

It used to work. But suddenly *all* my wiki pages lost their tocs, without changing
anything AFAICT.

This feature was implemented and it was working for a while, but then we had a
regression defect that made it stop working.  That is being tracked in  issue 2261 .
You may want to star that issue. We have a fix ready, but that fix has not been
deployed to the live servers yet.