On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 1:15 PM, Pinkham, Jim <Jim.Pinkham at voith.com> wrote:
> Hi, Peter --
> Thanks for taking this on. The sequence is 1,2,2,1. The first three are
> fine. The second 2 is indeed accomplished by the cross-reference
> technique. The only thing I had expected, based on the marked-up manual
> I'm revising, was that the final footnote would be a 3, not a 1. Based
> on Art's comment, the 1 is apparently what should be expected because it
> is a new table. If there's another way to get to 3 for the final note,
> in addition to the approach Art suggested, I'd be interested to learn
> about it and consider going that route.
Unless it's possible to fake the two tables as a single table, I'm out of ideas.