Re: footnote renumber bug

[Matthew Lundin <mdl@imapmail.org>]

> Scot Becker wrote:
>> Matthew,
>>
>> No apologies needed.  A good explanation like yours is a valuable
>> thing to have sitting in the mailing list archive (and perhaps even in
>> a more formal spot, in the Worg article: "Academic writing with Org,"
>> which I will someday help you write.)
>>
Scot:

Yes indeed. I would be delighted to collaborate on a Worg page on
academic writing. Org-mode has been such a helpful tool for my own work
that I would very much like to share the tips and tricks I've discovered
over the past year.

Andreas Röhler <andreas.roehler@easy-emacs.de> writes:

> Hi Scot,
>
> you are completely right. But there was not delivered a serious apology.
>
> That's been pure rhetoric formula out of courtesy.
> At least that's what I understood not being a native english speaker.
>
> Seeing the danger of raising flame-wars,
> which we have seen at several occasions, consider that rather a
>  recommendable style.
>

Andreas:

Right! I wanted to avoid any impression that I was trying to start a
flame war between org-footnote and footnote.el. The fact that emacs has
two powerful footnote mechanisms is a testimony to the versatility of
the editor and the strength of the emacs community.

Goodness knows, there are far too many flame wars already, and we emacs
folk need to stick together![1]

Best,
Matt

Footnotes:

[1] Besides, everyone knows that both org-footnote and footnote.el can
run circles around anything "that other editor" is capable of. ;)