From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicolas Goaziou Subject: Re: [bug, patch, ox] INCLUDE and footnotes Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2014 22:37:36 +0100 Message-ID: <87h9x4bj33.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> References: <87h9x5hwso.fsf@gmx.us> <87oarcbppe.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87fvcozfhf.fsf@gmx.us> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38325) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XySSi-0001pk-1h for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Dec 2014 16:37:01 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XySSY-0002ei-At for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Dec 2014 16:36:51 -0500 Received: from relay5-d.mail.gandi.net ([2001:4b98:c:538::197]:56397) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XySSY-0002ea-4U for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Dec 2014 16:36:42 -0500 Received: from mfilter12-d.gandi.net (mfilter12-d.gandi.net [217.70.178.129]) by relay5-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id F151E41C04F for ; Tue, 9 Dec 2014 22:36:40 +0100 (CET) Received: from relay5-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.197]) by mfilter12-d.gandi.net (mfilter12-d.gandi.net [10.0.15.180]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qvuuMalkTGER for ; Tue, 9 Dec 2014 22:36:39 +0100 (CET) Received: from selenimh (unknown [91.224.148.150]) (Authenticated sender: mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr) by relay5-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6DC7A41C064 for ; Tue, 9 Dec 2014 22:36:39 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <87fvcozfhf.fsf@gmx.us> (rasmus@gmx.us's message of "Tue, 09 Dec 2014 22:21:32 +0100") List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Rasmus writes: > Clearly the current situation is not satisfactory ("You can use :lines, > but only if no footnotes are present. . . IOW, :lines supports a subset > of Org syntax."). > > I prefer converting [fn:N] references to [fn::FOOTNOTE] (see my other > email). Any obvious downsides? Yes: inline and regular footnotes are not equivalent. For example, a regular footnote can contain a table, a plain list... So this is not an option here. I think required definitions should be extracted from the included file and inserted at the end of the source file, without any footnote section. However, it would be nice to store associations between files and footnote labels in, e.g., a hash table, in order to avoid inserting multiple times the same footnote. Regards,