INCLUDE_presentations doesn't work? :-D
Good pick Tony!

Heh. Sadly not. That's what I was actually looking for... ;-)

Do you know what INCLUDE_TABLE_OF_CONTENTS is for? I see nothing change with that parameter set to true.

Neat hack.

So that might mean they pay/ plan to pay licensing fees to Merriam Webster, right... (hmm, can Google *acquire* Merriam Webster or a similar company? It seems it's so close to the "organizing information" mantra...)

They don't pay Answer.com for the current link from the SERPs, but in this case, they're doing more than linking by including the information right with Google Docs...
On a sidenote I think Answer.com's definition (from the American Heritage Dictionary) are easier to read... at least going by the "digging" example.

Yeah that's a cool hack Tony.
Thanks :)

Hey! This is cool, thanks :-)

<< Do you know what INCLUDE_TABLE_OF_CONTENTS is for? >>

No. I tried that too but didn't see any changes. I suspect it may change a setting used somewhere else.

It's for including a table of contents in a document, like in Microsoft Word. Hopefully they'll also add pagination.

Ionut, I'm guessing that's what it's for but couldn't see any evidence to support that. Could you?

[Post edit: I've just updated the dictionary definition image as I realised it showed the definition for "digging" rather than "Google".]

No, but it's pretty obvious. Even Zoho has it: http://blogs.zoho.com/writer/add-table-of-contents-to-your-zoho-writer-docs/

Of course. Take a look at this message:

var MSG_TOC_NEED_HEADERS="A table of documents cannot be generated for documents that do not use the Header paragraph styles.";

[I'm guessing that should say "table of contents" instead.]

From: http://docs.google.com/Localizer?f=AllMsgs.hdf&v=dkx4

Which is exactly how Word does it but I don't see any Header paragraph styles available in Google Docs. If we could switch them on first, setting that flag might work.

Click on the Style button in the toolbar.

>> Click on the Style button in the toolbar.

Ah yes. Of course... ;-) I actually added some by editing the HTML.

Also, all the TOC functions in http://docs.google.com/javascript/EditorToolbar.js?v=fc4h give clues as to how they're going to do this. Unfortunately, for those functions to be defined, INCLUDE_TABLE_OF_CONTENTS needs to be true on page load.

Hey this is a very neat hack.

Good find Tony. Dictionary and thesaurus features would surely add more value to value of Docs. So to raise a similar point to Philip's, I'm sure a licensing deal is the works (are most probably already sealed) between Google and Merriam Webster. I don't know how much licensing opportunities Merriam has besides their core products (print), but this sure puts a little happy note on its future amidst the Wikipedia onslaught. ;).

Judging on the raw presentation of the information though, this looks like a work in progress.

Bah, if you can't wait to have this feature permanently...
http://googlified.com/files/scripts/google-docs-include-britannica.user.js

GreaseMonkey required.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greasemonkey#Similar_software

cool :)

Nice find...it sounds like it's only a matter of time before Tony finds the "INCLUDE_GDRIVE_SERVICE=1" parameter on the Google homepage :P

Google's actually inline framing the M-W dictionary pages... Not parsing through their servers, so it's probably your browser/computer having problem with the interpunct (middle dot).

http://www2.merriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/collegiate?Google

<< ... it's probably your browser/computer having problem with the interpunct ... >>

Weird. It still wasn't working in either Internet Explorer and Firefox until I viewed the page merriam-webster.com on its own. Now FF works fine but IE still doesn't display it properly inline. Did it work fine for you the first time you viewed it inline?

Aha. I've posted an update about this. It seems that Google uses UTF-8 encoding whereas the Merriam-Webster frame could be using Windows-1252.

It's not Tony's browser or computer that's the issue – Merriam-Webster's page contains a character encoding bug, as they don't send a character encoding HTTP header (nor do they have the encoding specified in the meta declaration):

> HTTP/1.1 200 OK
> Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 20:42:42 GMT
> Server: Apache/1.3.27 (Unix) mod_perl/1.29
> Connection: close
> Content-Type: text/html
http://www.webrankinfo.com/english/tools/server-header.php
http://www2.merriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/collegiate?Google

This means the browser can now take an educated guess, but basically decide on whatever it wants in regards to an encoding, and it's usually Firefox's style to take the last encoding of the page that links to the "encoding-deprived" page. In this case, that might be UTF-8, whereas Merriam-Webster's pages are perhaps originally stored (not actually presented) in ISO-8859-1 (which seems to be compatible with the Windows-1252 fallback Firefox picks at other times – this pick is what you'll see when you right-click the page you're on and select "view page info"). The "educated guessing" of encodings make these things always flaky to reproduce; it might also be triggered by different characters the browsers finds at the beginning of a page.

How do you find these???