Here are 2 test cases for footnotes. Perhaps they can be put in a test directory somewhere if they are useful.
My old relatively thorough test case with 11 specific documented points to test for: http://www.mail-archive.com/emacs-orgmode@gnu.org/msg10877.html And my recent one, sloppily put together and reproduced here: * top *** an article sadfkaj sdnfklaj nsfklandsf asd flkajnd sfa *** an article. exporting this to ascii does not export anonymous footnotes I sometimes[fn:3] mix regular[fn:1] footnotes and inline [fn:: There are issues here. For example, I have to type them in manually. You cannot leave empty; it won't accept it. Maybe it has to do with my ido setup. Exporting this to ASCII seems to silent fail. I tried "fn:: text" and "fn::text".] ones[fn:2]. === [fn:1] ordinary. note that if you put point here and do c-c c-c, you will get sent to the next article, which is disconcerting. i expected it to go up to the thing that points to it. this situation, where you have duplicate footnote numbers in the same file, but different org entries, is very common when you refile an article. \par don't know how to separate paragraphs in a footnote in a way that fill-paragraph with filladapt will understand. would be nice if a way were possible, imo. [fn:2] another [fn:3] a third # a comment *** another article ordinary [fn:1], inline[fn:This is a test.], and regular[fn:2] footnotes. === [fn:1] regular [fn:2] usual *** another article asdfj alkdfn akljdn fklajdf askdfn al;ksjnf lajdnf klajdnf skjdhflakjdnf klajnf [fn:1] [fn:1] test *** another article asdknf lakjdnf ak asdkjfn aldjf On 2010-04-16, Dan Davison <davi...@stats.ox.ac.uk> wrote: > I hadn't forgotten about this but I have been conscious that I wasn't > giving it the testing it deserved. I don't export with footnotes that > much, and when I do it tends to be to HTML. So I haven't noticed any > problems, but perhaps some others who use footnotes more seriously than > me could test out this patch for a bit? Sorry, I know I should have sent > this email ages ago! -- Q: How many CDC "scientists" does it take to change a lightbulb? A: "You only think it's dark." [CDC has denied a deadly disease for 25 years] ========== Retrovirus: http://www.wpinstitute.org/xmrv/index.html _______________________________________________ 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
