Re: [O] Bug: Org-mode don't export to html footnotes references inside footnotes as such. [7.8.03]
Nicolas Goaziou n.goaz...@gmail.com writes: If one intends to export his Org file to ODT, then nested footnote construction should be avoided like plague. It isn't really supported in LaTeX too, but there are workarounds. There are always workarounds, but footnotes within footnotes aren't directly supported by any publishing system I know of, and with good reason. A footnote, just like a marginal, is an expansion on the main text that can be skipped without loss of information (but maybe loss of detail). So whenever you feel that you need a footnote within a footnote, you could just as well have two footnotes at the original place. If such thing isn't possible, ODT back-end will ignore any footnote contained in another footnote (i.e. whose genealogy contains an element with an `footnote-reference' or `footnote-definition' type) and send a message to the user. It would be better to not promote the idea of footnotes within footnotes and those who insist on using that construct should be required to explicitly request that feature and suffer the consequences. Much better would be if starting a footnote while within a footnote would simply open a new footnote and add the reference at the same place where the first one was opened. Regards, Achim. -- +[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305 Neuron microQkb Andromeda XTk Blofeld]+ SD adaptation for Waldorf microQ V2.22R2: http://Synth.Stromeko.net/Downloads.html#WaldorfSDada
Re: [O] Bug: Org-mode don't export to html footnotes references inside footnotes as such. [7.8.03]
Hello, Achim Gratz strom...@nexgo.de writes: If one intends to export his Org file to ODT, then nested footnote construction should be avoided like plague. It isn't really supported in LaTeX too, but there are workarounds. There are always workarounds, but footnotes within footnotes aren't directly supported by any publishing system I know of, and with good reason. A footnote, just like a marginal, is an expansion on the main text that can be skipped without loss of information (but maybe loss of detail). That's what I thought before the OP request. Though, it appears that it is a not so rare need. For example critical editions seem to use it quite often. So whenever you feel that you need a footnote within a footnote, you could just as well have two footnotes at the original place. I have never needed nested footnotes, so I feel like the Devil's advocate but anyway... Imagine a very large footnote, spanning over tens of lines. You would like to add a footnote next to a word in the middle of that text. I suppose it wouldn't make sense to get out of that footnote and be told there's another reference for a word you read many lines ago. If such thing isn't possible, ODT back-end will ignore any footnote contained in another footnote (i.e. whose genealogy contains an element with an `footnote-reference' or `footnote-definition' type) and send a message to the user. It would be better to not promote the idea of footnotes within footnotes and those who insist on using that construct should be required to explicitly request that feature and suffer the consequences. Note that Org inherently supports nested footnotes. Forbidding them would be much like an artificial limitation. I don't mind such limitation, but knowing that they may happen to be useful, it's worth pondering if it really should be so. Much better would be if starting a footnote while within a footnote would simply open a new footnote and add the reference at the same place where the first one was opened. That's a possible workaround I was talking about earlier. And it's perfectly possible with the experimental exporter. ODT back-end may implement it. That's mostly what I did with the LaTeX back-end. Nested footnotes definitions are inserted right after the top level footnote definition containing them. Only footnotes markers are nested. Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou
Re: [O] Bug: Org-mode don't export to html footnotes references inside footnotes as such. [7.8.03]
Nicolas Goaziou n.goaz...@gmail.com writes: Hello, oitofe...@gmail.com (Bruno Félix Rezende Ribeiro) writes: Consider the following org code: -- This is only a text.[1] [1] This is a text body's footnote.[2] [2] This is a footnote's footnote. -- When org-mode exports this code to html, despite the fact that footnote 2 is present in the final document, it don't exports footnote 2 reference as a link to footnote 2; it's exported just like plain text. There's no official support for nested footnotes in current exporter. Implementing it would be non trivial (it may be for the HTML back-end, but clearly not for the LaTeX one). Since we're working on a new export engine, I don't think it's worth the effort. Though, your report made me implement it in the experimental exporter. From OpenDocument-1.2 spec has the following note , | 6.3.4text:note-body | | The text:note-body element contains the content of a note. It does not | have any attributes. | | Note: The schema allows for the inclusion of notes into the note | body. While this may be reasonable for note types, it is not reasonable | for footnotes and endnotes. Conforming consumers need not support notes | inside notes. ` LibreOffice doesn't support notes inside notes. So for all practical purposes, nested footnotes cannot be supported with ODT export (in both the legacy and in-the-works experimental version). If one intends to export his Org file to ODT, then nested footnote construction should be avoided like plague. Thank you. Regards, --
Re: [O] Bug: Org-mode don't export to html footnotes references inside footnotes as such. [7.8.03]
Hello, Jambunathan K kjambunat...@gmail.com writes: Nicolas Goaziou n.goaz...@gmail.com writes: Hello, oitofe...@gmail.com (Bruno Félix Rezende Ribeiro) writes: Consider the following org code: -- This is only a text.[1] [1] This is a text body's footnote.[2] [2] This is a footnote's footnote. -- When org-mode exports this code to html, despite the fact that footnote 2 is present in the final document, it don't exports footnote 2 reference as a link to footnote 2; it's exported just like plain text. There's no official support for nested footnotes in current exporter. Implementing it would be non trivial (it may be for the HTML back-end, but clearly not for the LaTeX one). Since we're working on a new export engine, I don't think it's worth the effort. Though, your report made me implement it in the experimental exporter. From OpenDocument-1.2 spec has the following note , | 6.3.4text:note-body | | The text:note-body element contains the content of a note. It does not | have any attributes. | | Note: The schema allows for the inclusion of notes into the note | body. While this may be reasonable for note types, it is not reasonable | for footnotes and endnotes. Conforming consumers need not support notes | inside notes. ` LibreOffice doesn't support notes inside notes. So for all practical purposes, nested footnotes cannot be supported with ODT export (in both the legacy and in-the-works experimental version). If one intends to export his Org file to ODT, then nested footnote construction should be avoided like plague. It isn't really supported in LaTeX too, but there are workarounds. If such thing isn't possible, ODT back-end will ignore any footnote contained in another footnote (i.e. whose genealogy contains an element with an `footnote-reference' or `footnote-definition' type) and send a message to the user. Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou
Re: [O] Bug: Org-mode don't export to html footnotes references inside footnotes as such. [7.8.03]
Hello, oitofe...@gmail.com (Bruno Félix Rezende Ribeiro) writes: Consider the following org code: -- This is only a text.[1] [1] This is a text body's footnote.[2] [2] This is a footnote's footnote. -- When org-mode exports this code to html, despite the fact that footnote 2 is present in the final document, it don't exports footnote 2 reference as a link to footnote 2; it's exported just like plain text. There's no official support for nested footnotes in current exporter. Implementing it would be non trivial (it may be for the HTML back-end, but clearly not for the LaTeX one). Since we're working on a new export engine, I don't think it's worth the effort. Though, your report made me implement it in the experimental exporter. Thank you. Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou
