From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicolas Goaziou Subject: Re: Bug: Org-mode don't export to html footnotes references inside footnotes as such. [7.8.03] Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2012 13:47:27 +0100 Message-ID: <874nu4fs80.fsf@gmail.com> References: <87ipivy7cu.fsf@felix-laptop.gnung> <87zkc5g3z2.fsf@gmail.com> <81aa3xo2nw.fsf@gmail.com> <87bood5sn1.fsf@gmail.com> <87pqcsvet9.fsf@Rainer.invalid> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:36986) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S4Asr-0005CH-Iv for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 04 Mar 2012 07:49:55 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S4Asp-0000dq-LQ for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 04 Mar 2012 07:49:53 -0500 Received: from mail-we0-f169.google.com ([74.125.82.169]:47005) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S4Asp-0000dX-Bk for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 04 Mar 2012 07:49:51 -0500 Received: by werj55 with SMTP id j55so2408796wer.0 for ; Sun, 04 Mar 2012 04:49:49 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <87pqcsvet9.fsf@Rainer.invalid> (Achim Gratz's message of "Sun, 04 Mar 2012 11:30:26 +0100") List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Achim Gratz Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Hello, Achim Gratz 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