Re: [Orgmode] Difference between org-footnote.el and footnote.el

Re: [Orgmode] Difference between org-footnote.el and footnote.el

[Andreas Röhler]

[ ... ]
>
> Oh, I was pretty sure that org-footnote.el is only a wrapper around the
> original footnote.el that comes with emacs, but looking at the code it
> seems to be a completely separate facility.
>
> It says to have "better support for resuming editing" than footnote.el
> but be less configurable.  Can someone enlighten my what is meant with
> that better support for resuming editing?  I mean, footnote.el already
> provides automatic renumbering which is the only special feature I can
> imagine to be of great use when resuming to edit a footnoted document...
>
> Bye,
> Tassilo
>
>

Hi Tassilo,

common footnote.el was never able to detect if a file opened has already 
footnote inside. Didn't check that for some month now...

Also org-footnote implemented labeled footnotes, very useful to avoid 
clashes with forms like list[1]

BTW suggest to replace the common footnote by the org's footnotes, 
remove the prefix then, leave some aliases in org-mode for 
backward-compatibility.

cc to emacs-devel for this.

Cheers

Andreas

--
https://code.launchpad.net/~a-roehler/python-mode/python-mode-components
https://code.launchpad.net/s-x-emacs-werkstatt/

Re: [Orgmode] Difference between org-footnote.el and footnote.el

[Tassilo Horn]

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

Hi Andreas,

>> Oh, I was pretty sure that org-footnote.el is only a wrapper around
>> the original footnote.el that comes with emacs, but looking at the
>> code it seems to be a completely separate facility.
>>
>> It says to have "better support for resuming editing" than
>> footnote.el but be less configurable.  Can someone enlighten my what
>> is meant with that better support for resuming editing?  I mean,
>> footnote.el already provides automatic renumbering which is the only
>> special feature I can imagine to be of great use when resuming to
>> edit a footnoted document...
>
> common footnote.el was never able to detect if a file opened has
> already footnote inside. Didn't check that for some month now...

Yes, I've just tried that.  Create a file with footnotes, save it, kill
the buffer, find it again, add another footnote, and it starts numbering
from [1] again.  Looks like a bug to me.  I'll report it...

> Also org-footnote implemented labeled footnotes, very useful to avoid
> clashes with forms like list[1]
>
> BTW suggest to replace the common footnote by the org's footnotes, remove the
> prefix then, leave some aliases in org-mode for backward-compatibility.

Well, I don't have a strong opinion on that.  But currently
org-footnote.el is not very good when writing mails, because it places
footnotes at the end of a buffer.  If there's a signature, then
footnotes are in that and likely to be removed by people replying to
your mail.

Bye,
Tassilo

Re: [Orgmode] Difference between org-footnote.el and footnote.el

[Tassilo Horn]

Tassilo Horn <tassilo@member.fsf.org> writes:

>> common footnote.el was never able to detect if a file opened has
>> already footnote inside. Didn't check that for some month now...
>
> Yes, I've just tried that.  Create a file with footnotes, save it, kill
> the buffer, find it again, add another footnote, and it starts numbering
> from [1] again.  Looks like a bug to me.  I'll report it...

Done as bug#7258.

Bye,
Tassilo

Re: Difference between org-footnote.el and footnote.el

[Nick Dokos]

Tassilo Horn <tassilo@member.fsf.org> wrote:


> > BTW suggest to replace the common footnote by the org's footnotes, remove the
> > prefix then, leave some aliases in org-mode for backward-compatibility.
> 
> Well, I don't have a strong opinion on that.  But currently
> org-footnote.el is not very good when writing mails, because it places
> footnotes at the end of a buffer.  If there's a signature, then
> footnotes are in that and likely to be removed by people replying to
> your mail.
> 

How does footnote.el find the signature? I assumed before that
signatures are free-form and therefore unfindable algorithmically, but
that seems to be a mistake on my part. If that's the case, the
mechanism can be grafted into org-footnote.el, perhaps with an expanded
meaning of org-footnote-placement: in addition to nil or a string, it
can be a symbol, say 'before-signature, and that can be set in an appropriate
mail composition hook.

Nick

_______________________________________________
Emacs-orgmode mailing list
Please use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode

Re: [Orgmode] Difference between org-footnote.el and footnote.el

[Andreas Röhler]

Am 21.10.2010 17:05, schrieb Nick Dokos:
> Tassilo Horn<tassilo@member.fsf.org>  wrote:
>
>
>>> BTW suggest to replace the common footnote by the org's footnotes, remove the
>>> prefix then, leave some aliases in org-mode for backward-compatibility.
>>
>> Well, I don't have a strong opinion on that.  But currently
>> org-footnote.el is not very good when writing mails, because it places
>> footnotes at the end of a buffer.  If there's a signature, then
>> footnotes are in that and likely to be removed by people replying to
>> your mail.
>>
>
> How does footnote.el find the signature? I assumed before that
> signatures are free-form and therefore unfindable algorithmically, but
> that seems to be a mistake on my part. If that's the case, the
> mechanism can be grafted into org-footnote.el, perhaps with an expanded
> meaning of org-footnote-placement: in addition to nil or a string, it
> can be a symbol, say 'before-signature, and that can be set in an appropriate
> mail composition hook.
>
> Nick
>
>

Hi,

there is no stringent relation between footnote.el and mail.
It's misplaced IMHO, mentioned that years ago BTW, it belongs into 
text-modes directory.

Keeping things easy, it seems preferable to have a working common 
footnote first and reflect the use in mails resp. signature issue 
afterwards.

Andreas

--
https://code.launchpad.net/~a-roehler/python-mode/python-mode-components
https://code.launchpad.net/s-x-emacs-werkstatt/

Re: [Orgmode] Difference between org-footnote.el and footnote.el

[Tassilo Horn]

Andreas Röhler <andreas.roehler@online.de> writes:

Hi Andreas,

> Keeping things easy, it seems preferable to have a working common
> footnote first and reflect the use in mails resp. signature issue
> afterwards.

I don't get it.  The "common" footnote.el works great with email and
signatures, but doesn't recognize existing footnotes when revisiting a
file.  org-footnote.el doesn't (yet) handle signatures in mails and
requires some macros and compatibility functions from org, but it
recognizes existing footnotes.

Bye,
Tassilo

Re: [Orgmode] Difference between org-footnote.el and footnote.el

[Andreas Röhler]

Am 21.10.2010 19:52, schrieb Tassilo Horn:
> Andreas Röhler<andreas.roehler@online.de>  writes:
>
> Hi Andreas,
>
>> Keeping things easy, it seems preferable to have a working common
>> footnote first and reflect the use in mails resp. signature issue
>> afterwards.
>
> I don't get it.  The "common" footnote.el works great with email and
> signatures, but doesn't recognize existing footnotes when revisiting a
> file.  org-footnote.el doesn't (yet) handle signatures in mails and
> requires some macros and compatibility functions from org, but it
> recognizes existing footnotes.
>
> Bye,
> Tassilo
>

Hi Tassilo,

thanks, missed that aspect.

Andreas

Re: [Orgmode] Difference between org-footnote.el and footnote.el

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Andreas Röhler writes:
 > Am 21.10.2010 17:05, schrieb Nick Dokos:

 > > How does footnote.el find the signature? I assumed before that
 > > signatures are free-form and therefore unfindable
 > > algorithmically,

Nope.  Signatures are delimited by "\n-- \n".  What comes after the
dash-dash-space (the trailing space is significant here) is indeed
free-form.

 > there is no stringent relation between footnote.el and mail.

Well, actually, there is.  The author's intent was that it be used
mostly in mail, and in particular in an MUA that appends the signature
file after the user issues the "send" command.  It was not really
designed to be suitable for use in other contexts.  It made things
much simpler for him if he assumed that the document would be
completed in a single session.  That's why he never bothered dealing
with reading a document in from a file, and the buffer format is not
well-tuned to that kind of usage, either.

 > Keeping things easy, it seems preferable to have a working common 
 > footnote first and reflect the use in mails resp. signature issue 
 > afterwards.

If org-mode has a footnoting capability, it's probably a better bet
for future maintenance for the reasons mentioned above.  If
footnote.el is actually generalizable, that would probably surprise
the author. :-)