Absolutely - in fact, using the presence of offset to indicate *I'm a footnote* was just a practical solution since I am sure some projects won't *always* want annotations to become footnotes, and with this check wouldn't need to specify explicitly *when* and *when not*.
However, maybe it would be best to go ahead and use a global boolean ((true) annotations always footnotes (regardless of offset), or (false) only when set in each context-mod to true (which could still be taken from offset's presence to avoid an additional/separate indication - at least while automatically-placed offsets don't exist). That may be the more appropriate way to handle it. Hmm, intelligent/automatic footnote offsets - that sure would be nice. On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 2:51 AM, Simon Albrecht <simon.albre...@mail.de> wrote: > On 05.07.2016 03:31, Jeffery Shivers wrote: > >> Since offset is presumably always going to be used for footnotes, I think >> *that* should be what triggers the footnote. So, inclusion of `offset = >> #'(...)` will tell scholarLY that the annotation is a footnote; otherwise >> it *isn't*. If it's preferred to rather have an explicit boolean (like >> apply-footnote = ##t, or whatever), that could work. But I will say that I >> prefer using something as obvious as offset as a sort of automatic >> indication of footnote-ness. >> > > As long as one _has_ to manually specify the offset, that’s sensible. And > if Lily ever gets clever enough to place the footnote items on her own, it > will be easy enough to change this behaviour, I assume. > > Best, Simon >
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
