Hello,
Christian Moe m...@christianmoe.com writes:
Would it make sense to be able to link to a footnote label? Rationale:
1. If a footnote definition is already meaningfully labeled, a dedicated
target is redundant.
2. Since you can link to named tables, source blocks etc., users might
Vaidheeswaran C vaidheeswaran.chinnar...@gmail.com writes:
Allow me to revisit this thread in a week or 10 days so that I can
1. take a look at ODF standard.
2. dig in to LibreOffice discussion lists to see whether such
instances have ever surfaced (and how they were dealt with).
Until
Vaidheeswaran vaidheeswaran.chinnar...@gmail.com writes:
What changes need to be made in ox.el and/or ox-odt.el so that the
snippet I shared produces the right XML acceptable for LibreOffice.
text1 [fn:1]
text2 [fn:2]
[fn:1] footdef1[fn:2]
[fn:2] footdef2
For purposes of ODT backend,
Allow me to revisit this thread in a week or 10 days so that I can
1. take a look at ODF standard.
2. dig in to LibreOffice discussion lists to see whether such
instances have ever surfaced (and how they were dealt with).
Until then, please keep the patch in waiting.
On Friday 13
Aloha Vaidheeswaran,
Thanks very much for the detailed response and the link to the book.
That's an interesting example I won't soon forget. The forward
reference in the footnote is unusual. In this case it appears to be
standing in for the lack of an index entry for either trichiliocosm or
Vaidheeswaran C vaidheeswaran.chinnar...@gmail.com writes:
I still think that the snippet I shared should have worked. Clearly
`org-export-footnote-first-reference-p' is misbehaving.
It does, e.g., when exporting to LaTeX. This is an odt limitation. So,
I disagree,
On Thursday 12 February 2015 02:42 AM, Nicolas Goaziou wrote:
It does, e.g., when exporting to LaTeX. This is an odt limitation. So,
I disagree, `org-export-footnote-first-reference-p' is correct here.
Let me put my question this way:
What changes need to be made in ox.el and/or ox-odt.el
On Thursday 12 February 2015 12:49 PM, Thomas S. Dye wrote:
Aloha Vaidheeswaran,
This is an odd example that I don't recall having seen in any
publication. I don't doubt examples might exist, but don't remember
having seen one. Can you point me to a real-world example of a footnote
referring
Aloha Vaidheeswaran,
This is an odd example that I don't recall having seen in any
publication. I don't doubt examples might exist, but don't remember
having seen one. Can you point me to a real-world example of a footnote
referring to a subsequent footnote that I might reference either on-line
On Tuesday 10 February 2015 06:26 PM, Christian Moe wrote:
Thanks for this. You have
[fn:1] footdef1[fn:2]
[fn:2] footdef2
What do you expect to see in ODT? Presumably not a footnote in a
footnote, since LibreOffice doesn't allow you to place one.
An ODT cross-reference to the
The attached file, when exported to ODT fails to open in LibreOffice
exporter. The reason failure is that the exported __XML__ file has
nested footnote definiton i.e., a footnote definition within a
footnote definiton. In concrete terms, there is some confusion wrt
the return value of
Hello,
Vaidheeswaran C vaidheeswaran.chinnar...@gmail.com writes:
That said, it is difficult for me to conceive of a footnote that is
referenced solely by other footnotes. i.e., it is reasonable to assume
that a given footnote is either not referenced at all or is referenced
atleast once in
Hello,
Christian Moe m...@christianmoe.com writes:
An ODT cross-reference to the footnote? That makes sense, but should
that be achieved by footnoting inside a footnote, or is the appropriate
thing to do to use a dedicated target and link?
[fn:1] footdef1, see also [[thatotherfootnote]].
On Wednesday 11 February 2015 11:32 AM, Vaidheeswaran wrote:
This should be fixed. Thank you.
Not yet. See attached files.
Operator error. Sorry.
On Wednesday 11 February 2015 02:59 AM, Nicolas Goaziou wrote:
Hello,
Vaidheeswaran Cvaidheeswaran.chinnar...@gmail.com writes:
That said, it is difficult for me to conceive of a footnote that is
referenced solely by other footnotes. i.e., it is reasonable to assume
that a given footnote is
On Wednesday 11 February 2015 02:58 AM, Nicolas Goaziou wrote:
Hello,
Christian Moem...@christianmoe.com writes:
An ODT cross-reference to the footnote? That makes sense, but should
that be achieved by footnoting inside a footnote, or is the appropriate
thing to do to use a dedicated target
Hi,
Thanks for this. You have
[fn:1] footdef1[fn:2]
[fn:2] footdef2
What do you expect to see in ODT? Presumably not a footnote in a
footnote, since LibreOffice doesn't allow you to place one.
An ODT cross-reference to the footnote? That makes sense, but should
that be achieved by
17 matches
Mail list logo
