From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jambunathan K Subject: Re: org-html: subtree specific footnote references Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 10:08:50 +0530 Message-ID: <81bojogrhh.fsf@gmail.com> References: <87txxjuysd.fsf@chaos.shergill.su> <87zk7b72dj.fsf@chaos.shergill.su> <818vess2cb.fsf@gmail.com> <871ukk9rla.fsf@chaos.shergill.su> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:53777) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SoSE3-0004XT-6z for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 00:39:04 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SoSE1-0005lT-Fg for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 00:39:02 -0400 Received: from mail-pb0-f41.google.com ([209.85.160.41]:53648) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SoSE1-0005lG-6d for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 00:39:01 -0400 Received: by pbbrp2 with SMTP id rp2so23066259pbb.0 for ; Mon, 09 Jul 2012 21:38:59 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <871ukk9rla.fsf@chaos.shergill.su> (Suhail Shergill's message of "Tue, 10 Jul 2012 04:18:25 +0000") 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: Suhail Shergill Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Suhail Shergill writes: > Jambunathan K writes: > >>>> running org-export-as-html on a subtree is currently problematic if >>>> the result is to be merged into a document which contains html-ized >>>> versions of other subtrees: the footnote references and definitions >>>> get clobbered. >> >> Do the subtrees come from the same org file? > > that is the use case, yes. Try marking the subtrees with :export: tag. Lookup the following in the mailing list, worg or the info manual. #+EXPORT_SELECT_TAGS: Tags that select a tree for export #+EXPORT_EXCLUDE_TAGS: Tags that exclude a tree from export With this, do footnotes come out along the expected lines? >> Won't it look odd and confusing to a reader, when there are two >> different footnote definitions with the same number. > > yes i agree that would be very confusing. but why, pray tell, would > there be two different definitions with the same number? you haven't modified the description have you? >> Confusion is like to be pronounced, if the reader chooses to also print out >> the document as a pdf or into paper. > > the *only* behavioural change that this effects is that the links (and backlinks > from the definitions to references) will continue to work properly even in the > event the user decides to merge the result of multiple subtree exports into one > single document. Links are visible when stuff is printed out on paper. Is it? --