From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Lundin Subject: Re: footnote renumber bug Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2009 16:53:34 -0500 Message-ID: <874otuwy3l.fsf@fastmail.fm> References: <4A4C59EE.9020602@online.de> <4A4C9DA8.1010502@gmx.de> <4A4CB3B4.3010405@easy-emacs.de> <87ab3ngk6w.fsf@fastmail.fm> <4A4D13E2.5060707@easy-emacs.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MMUBv-0003zc-Oe for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Jul 2009 17:51:39 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MMUBr-0003v4-UV for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Jul 2009 17:51:39 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=49651 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MMUBr-0003un-Gi for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Jul 2009 17:51:35 -0400 Received: from out2.smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.26]:45695) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MMUBr-0005nS-1D for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Jul 2009 17:51:35 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4A4D13E2.5060707@easy-emacs.de> ("Andreas =?utf-8?Q?R=C3=B6h?= =?utf-8?Q?ler=22's?= message of "Thu, 02 Jul 2009 22:09:06 +0200") List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Andreas =?utf-8?Q?R=C3=B6hler?= Cc: emacs org-mode mailing list Hi Andreas, Andreas R=C3=B6hler writes: > Matthew Lundin wrote: >> Footnote.el, by contrast, was designed for short email messages in which >> there is no distinction between source text and exported text. Though it >> serves this limited purpose admirably, it offers only a very rudimentary >> numbering system rather than a complete markup solution. For any complex >> writing (e.g., a research paper with dozens of footnotes), footnote.el >> is well-nigh impossible to use. There are simply too many chances of >> broken or mixed up links. >>=20=20=20 > > Ignoring the guts of org-modes footnote implementation, just my impression > of footnote.el: > > it's fine by architecture and --if patched-- well capable for all things > you want to do with footnotes. > Can't see any limitation concerning larger texts. > It simply wasn't --or isn't-- written to the end. Thanks for the clarification. Reading over my email, I believe I may stated some conclusions about footnote.el too strongly. What I should have said is that *in my own experience* I have found footnote.el difficult to use (in its pre-patched form, of course).=20 Try as I might, I could never get Footnote-renumber-footnotes to do anything. And if I moved any footnotes in the original text, deleted them manually, or reopened a document with footnotes, Footnote-add-footnote behaved unpredictably, creating duplicate numbers, skipping numbers, putting footnotes in the wrong order, placing footnotes randomly above and below the "Footnotes:" line, etc.=20 Very likely, my issues with footnote.el were due to my own lack of understanding of its mechanics, and I can see how your patch fixes things up quite a bit. It will be a really nice contribution to emacs if footnote.el is fixed, since modes such as Muse rely on it. Also, my apologies for a somewhat wordy defense of org-footnote. I wrote it only because I am a very big fan. :) Regards, Matt