https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=145239
Heiko Tietze <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |WONTFIX CC|libreoffice-ux-advise@lists |heiko.tietze@documentfounda |.freedesktop.org |tion.org Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Keywords|needsDevAdvice, needsUXEval | Component|LibreOffice |Writer --- Comment #10 from Heiko Tietze <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Walter Tuvell from comment #8) > As for references, Google for "sequence of symbols used for footnotes". http://printwiki.org/Footnote "1. asterisk (*), 2. dagger (†), 3. double dagger (††), 4. paragraph symbol (¶), 5. section mark (§), 6. parallel rules (||), 7. number sign (#)." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Note_(typography) "...the traditional order of these symbols in English is *, †, ‡, §, ‖, ¶." > ...the first 4 hits showed 4 different sequences Which is a good reason to pre-define the sequence. CMOS did that and we follow. > But note also my comment about "🞶=U+1F7B6 ≠ *=U+002A". Have seen it. Quite dangerous for a hard-coded character using a variable font. So again: the idea is charming, brings all the flexibility we want to offer, and might be not too difficult to implement. But we better do not allow deviations from the standard. If you want to use the "MEDIUM SIX SPOKED ASTERISK" just do it without the automatic numbering. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
