From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Matthias Paulmier <matthias.paulmier@etu.u-bordeaux.fr>
Subject: Re: HTML Export - Footnotes inconcistency
Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2018 21:06:10 +0200
Message-ID: <87h8i5wkpp.fsf@mpaulmier.home>
References: <87k1n5ssnp.fsf@mpaulmier.home> <8736tpzhvv.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52660)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <matthias.paulmier@etu.u-bordeaux.fr>)
	id 1g73WX-0003Gk-5N
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Oct 2018 15:06:29 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <matthias.paulmier@etu.u-bordeaux.fr>)
	id 1g73WT-0003u9-4i
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Oct 2018 15:06:28 -0400
Received: from v-zimmta03.u-bordeaux.fr ([147.210.215.83]:52305)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <matthias.paulmier@etu.u-bordeaux.fr>)
	id 1g73WS-0003Iv-T1
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Oct 2018 15:06:25 -0400
In-Reply-To: <8736tpzhvv.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> (Nicolas Goaziou's message of
	"Mon, 01 Oct 2018 19:39:00 +0200")
List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." <emacs-orgmode.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode/>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Emacs-orgmode"
	<emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: Nicolas Goaziou <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org

Hello,

Nicolas Goaziou <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr> writes:
> This is intended, in a way, since the inline footnote is not a paragraph
> by itself. It is contained within a paragraph. This explains why you
> cannot have blank lines within an inline footnote.

I think I get the logic behind it. The problem is the inconsistency it
creates for the viewer. Does it really matter for them if I wrote my
footnote inline or not?

Thanks for your answer.
--
Matthias Paulmier