Hello,
Matthias Paulmier writes:
> I came across this problem today (or maybe it is intended but I couldn't
> find any explanation in the docs). There is an inconsistency on how
> inline/anonymous and named footnotes are exported in HTML. For example,
> with the following source:
>
> #+TITLE: Testing footnotes
> #+LANGUAGE: en
>
> Testing[fn::test1] footnotes[fn:2]
>
> [fn:2] test2
>
>
> Exports to this :
>
> Footnotes:
>
>
> href="#fnr.1">1 test1
>
> href="#fnr.2">2
> test2
>
> We can see here that the named footnote creates a paragraph of the same
> class as the parent container "footpara" whereas the inlined one doesn't
> create this. If this is intended, why? If not, which is the intended
> one?
This is intended, in a way, since the inline footnote is not a paragraph
by itself. It is contained within a paragraph. This explains why you
cannot have blank lines within an inline footnote.
OTOH, a footnote definition can contain multiple paragraphs.
I don't know if that's a good thing, but these differences at the Org
level are translated into the HTML output.
Regards,
--
Nicolas Goaziou
