Re: [O] Footnotes in the manual (hidden option?)
Hello, ST writes: > I saw only "fn:" related variations in the docs... Indeed, but every variation needs to be handled specifically, so it ultimately counts as a different syntax. > Even if somebody else implements this and provides a patch?... Yes, please. This is a matter of design, not implementation. I'd like to stabilize Org syntax as much as possible. As a rule of thumb, I would only consider syntax changes only for: 1. broken syntax 2. missing feature 3. syntax hindering compatibility (e.g., conditional syntax) Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou
Re: [O] Footnotes in the manual (hidden option?)
Hello, > > > (a) May I propose the [^1] as an alternative footnotes syntax as a new > > feature? > > I sympathize with your concern, and [^1] may not have been a bad choice > when footnotes were introduced, but that ship has sailed long ago. > > There is enough footnote syntax in Org nowadays. I saw only "fn:" related variations in the docs... > I'd rather keep it that > way. Even if somebody else implements this and provides a patch?... Thank you!
Re: [O] Footnotes in the manual (hidden option?)
Hello, ST writes: > (a) May I propose the [^1] as an alternative footnotes syntax as a new > feature? I sympathize with your concern, and [^1] may not have been a bad choice when footnotes were introduced, but that ship has sailed long ago. There is enough footnote syntax in Org nowadays. I'd rather keep it that way. > (b) How can I define such syntax by my own as a footnote? You may have to tweak some libraries, e.g., org-footnote.el and org-element.el, but you're on your own here. Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou
Re: [O] Footnotes in the manual (hidden option?)
On Wed, 2018-05-16 at 14:31 -0400, Kaushal Modi wrote: > Hello, > > On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 2:27 PM ST wrote: > > Hello, > > in the manual > > https://orgmode.org/manual/Footnotes.html#Footnotes > > it says that footnotes[fn:1] > > [fn:1] look like this > > > but actually[1] > > [1] works as well and looks even better. > > So why this option is not documented? > > > I would think that's so because canonically Org mode using [fn:1] > style. It looks like you are manually typing the footnote refs and > definitions. > > > Try using C-c C-x f binding.. you will see that Org inserts the > footnotes in the documented style. > > > I would say that the "fn"-style footnotes remove any kind of > ambiguity.. It's true that [1] alone may very well introduce ambiguity, but why not to take something more lightweight and language/alphabet independent, like [^1]? 1. It's three times shorter (its important if you type manually in GitLab/GitHub without the C-c C-x f binding); 2. If you type in another language - you don't have to switch the keyboard; 3. If your text is in another alphabet - latin "fn" disturbs the eye. 4. It feels a bit heavy as a markup for the lightweight org . (a) May I propose the [^1] as an alternative footnotes syntax as a new feature? (b) How can I define such syntax by my own as a footnote? Thank you!
Re: [O] Footnotes in the manual (hidden option?)
Hello, Kaushal Modi writes: > I would think that's so because canonically Org mode using [fn:1] style. It > looks like you are manually typing the footnote refs and definitions. > > Try using C-c C-x f binding.. you will see that Org inserts the footnotes > in the documented style. > > I would say that the "fn"-style footnotes remove any kind of > ambiguity.. Moreover, [1]-like footnotes have been removed in 9.0. It's a bug if Org thinks [1] is a footnote. Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou
Re: [O] Footnotes in the manual (hidden option?)
Hello, On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 2:27 PM ST wrote: > Hello, > > in the manual > > https://orgmode.org/manual/Footnotes.html#Footnotes > > it says that footnotes[fn:1] > > [fn:1] look like this > > > but actually[1] > > [1] works as well and looks even better. > > So why this option is not documented? > I would think that's so because canonically Org mode using [fn:1] style. It looks like you are manually typing the footnote refs and definitions. Try using C-c C-x f binding.. you will see that Org inserts the footnotes in the documented style. I would say that the "fn"-style footnotes remove any kind of ambiguity.. -- Kaushal Modi
[O] Footnotes in the manual (hidden option?)
Hello, in the manual https://orgmode.org/manual/Footnotes.html#Footnotes it says that footnotes[fn:1] [fn:1] look like this but actually[1] [1] works as well and looks even better. So why this option is not documented? Thank you!
