Bastien writes:
> Instead of adapting those function, I'd have a function to inline
> external footnotes--and vice versa. This function would be helpful
> in this case but in other situations too.
+1!
Yours,
Christian
Hi Florian,
Florian Beck writes:
> Still, the original questions stands. Maybe `org-copy-subtree' and
> `org-paste-subtree' could be adapted?
Instead of adapting those function, I'd have a function to inline
external footnotes--and vice versa. This function would be helpful
in this case but i
On 3/20/13, Florian Beck wrote:
> Samuel Wales writes:
>> I find that inline footnotes solve a lot of problems:
> Absolutly. The main reason I don't generally inline footnotes is that I
> don't want to *see* them. Basically, footnotes are for readers that are
Others have proposed a command to c
Samuel Wales writes:
> I find that inline footnotes solve a lot of problems:
Absolutly. The main reason I don't generally inline footnotes is that I
don't want to *see* them. Basically, footnotes are for readers that are
not my primary audience; sometimes footnotes are only for me and I keep
the
Not a direct answer to your question, but:
I find that inline footnotes solve a lot of problems:
locality of reference is a huge deal both cognitively and
for organization; they cannot be put in the wrong sections
by mistake; they can't get numbers mixed up; they can't get
deleted or commented wit
Hi,
I need to copy subtrees between org-buffers, but `org-copy-subtree'
ignores footnotes (which is technically correct, I guess). Is there any
way to automate this?
--
Florian Beck
