On Mon, 4 Nov 2013 12:03:47 -0800 (PST) [email protected] wrote: > Thanks a lot Terry. > > Interesting approach. What I had in mind was something slightly different. > Instead of having a child node for each footnote, like you did in your > example (A, B, C, 1, 2, 3,...) I was considering having only two children > nodes called Numbers and Letters, and then storing all the footnotes within > one of the two. > I am now wondering which approach makes more sense, or which is easier to > manage. But probably there is not much difference.
I'm guessing implementation would be easier with separate nodes. > Anyway, a crucial issue for me is how easy it would be to manage the > footnotes. Are footnote links synchronized automatically between their two > places? For instance, if I delete the child note, would its reference also > be deleted in the main text, and viceversa? No, there's no behavior like that, Leo has no concept of footnotes per se. But it would be reasonably easy to code the behaviors you describe, certainly the deleting a footnote node deleting the reference in the parent text would be easy. > Also, can I insert a new footnote, for instance between A and B, and expect > the system to automatically update the names of all the following nodes? This might be possible, although using sequence numbers to refer to things is inherently fragile. If it was me I'd do something like naming the footnotes #provenance, #derivation, /piers-1967, #ibid, /doubtful etc. etc. where the # and / separate the numeric and letter flavors. Then you could have a script process things for output with letter and number markers in the order they first occur in the para. > Yet another question (but there are many others): can I have two different > keybindings for creating automatically, from the main text, the two > different types of child notes? Ideally, while editing the main text, I > would simply use the relevant key shortcut which will: (a) create the > footnote link in the main text (b) create the corresponding footnote node > and (c) shift the focus to that newly created footnote node, ready for > input. That would be straight forward. > I hope I am not asking too much. Also, are the above features yet to be > implemented (programmed), or are these available features already? No, Leo is a very flexible platform and would probably get you where you want to go faster than anything I can think of, but these features don't exist currently - how common is multi sequence footnote editing? :) > You see, all these practical aspects are quite important, because I am not > a real programmer. I can tinker a bit, but upto a certain point. Ease of > use is important for me. If you have some Python familiarity you might be able to tinker with a skeletal set up which handles the basics of the above without too much trouble. If you think the /sequence-A #sequence-B approach might work, implementation would be quite straight forward. A key-binding to jump from text to footnote, creating if needed, a @button command to scan for missing references / unused footnotes, and another to generate a throwaway version of the tree with the #names replaced with [A], [7] etc. Cheers -Terry > Thanks again for your help. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
