https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=159137
--- Comment #5 from William Friedman <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #4) > (In reply to William Friedman from comment #3) > > In the style guides I consulted (CMOS, MLA, APA, OSCOLA)... > Okay, the use case has a clear relevance (thanks for the elaboration). Thank you, Heiko, for sticking with this! > William, do you think a second reference type Previous/After (in addition to > Below/Above) solves the use case? Well, I think there needs to be two additional levels of customization for a Previous/After (or, in my preferred naming scheme, Previous/Next; the usual pairs are Before/After and Previous/Next [or: Previous/Following]). The first would be to customize the text for "Previous" *and* "After/Next"; in the example I gave in comment 3, that was "the previous note" and "the next note" (but some might prefer "the following note" and some might want to omit the definite article, etc.). So that's two customization options for the first level. The second level of customization would be for what to write if the referenced note *isn't* immediately before/after the current note, in my example, "see n. X." When I look at the current layout under Fields | Cross-references, I see that under "selection" there are two fields, both grayed out no matter which "refer using" type is selected: Name and Value. Name corresponds to the full text of the selected footnote, including its number. Value is empty. In order for this new option to work as I imagine it, we'd need additional editable fields: Previous Note Text: ________ Next/Following Note Text: ________ Non-Adjacent Note Text: ________ I *imagine* that the "non-adjacent note text" could assume that the cross-referenced note number would appear immediately after whatever text in the "non-adjacent note text" field, although someone might want to be able to customize this further. For example, I could imagine wanting the non-adjacent note text to include *two* reference types: "see n. X, above/below." This is something that is also currently a pain to do, requiring inserting two separate cross-references; perhaps if the feature I am proposing is implemented it would pave the way for a more general solution allowing fully customizing cross-reference text, allowing the insertion of *multiple* forms of reference in a single cross-reference, e.g., "see chapter X, n. Y, above/below" -- which would currently requires three *separate* cross-references! Thank you for your consideration of this feature request! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
