Re: Adventures with org-footnote-auto-adjust

[Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaziou@gmail.com>]

Hello,

tsd@tsdye.com (Thomas S. Dye) writes:

> In the document I'm editing, I have sentences like this:
>
>   If you want a list to start with a different value (e.g., 20),[fn:17]
>   start the text of the item with ~[@20]~.
>
> As a matter of style, I prefer the footnote (which contains qualifying
> text, rather than a reference) be at the end of the sentence, and that
> it immediately follow the period.  So, I cut and paste to get this:
>
>   If you want a list to start with a different value (e.g., 20),
>   start the text of the item with ~[@20]~.[fn:17]
>
> Now, the next time I insert a footnote, with C-c C-x f, I get something
> like this:
>
>   If you want a list to start with a different value (e.g., 20),[fn:17]
>   start the text of the item with ~[@20]~.[fn:17]
>
> The text of the original footnote, [fn:17], is lost, though the mark
> remains in the text.  If the new [fn:17] is some distance away, then the
> problem of duplicate numbers isn't readily apparent in the midst of
> other work.  Of course, I subsequently discovered that `~.[fn:17]'
> wasn't working and put the space back in.  Now, the footnote refers to
> the wrong text.
>
> I've learned that there are certain conditions (I don't know how many)
> where the space after a sentence won't accept a footnote insertion.

There shouldn't be any of such conditions.

> The example sentence is one of these. Apparently, it is the `~.'
> combination that triggers the condition. Org is good enough to
> prohibit inserting a new footnote into one of these "black holes"
> (which is how I discovered them), but it doesn't mind if I cut and
> paste a footnote into one.

I fixed it. Footnote references should be allowed there.

> I'm not certain how much mischief this might have caused. I discovered
> the problem when the text of *both* footnotes in a section of the
> document were incorrect.
>
> In my case, org-footnote-auto-adjust doesn't perform any crucial
> function--it just makes the Org mode buffer seem more orderly.  Given
> that there are "black holes" in the buffer, whose presence have the
> ability to confuse org-footnote-auto-adjust so that data are lost,
> should org-footnote-auto-adjust be deprecated?

`org-footnote-auto-adjust' still does its job when, for example, a new
footnote is created or a footnote is deleted. It is fragile when
copy-pasting a footnote reference across some text.

Anyway, it should be possible to fix most of these "black holes", if
only we are aware of them.

Thanks for your report.


Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Goaziou