Hello, Matt Lundin <m...@imapmail.org> writes:
> First, a general consideration: my vote would be for highlighting the > entire footnote label, including the brackets. IMO, leaving the brackets > in the default face makes it more difficult to scan the buffer. > (Similarly, I think it might be nice to fontify the entire contents of > inline footnotes.) I tend to disagree here: - if we fontify the whole contents, it may override any special fontification inside the inlined footnote (i.e. links, emphasis). Moreover, it would look ugly with multi-lines footnotes (white spaces at the beginning of the line are also fontified). - if we fontify the label and the brackets, it might be difficult to distinguish when two or more footnotes are bound together. In the case of a single inline footnote, the closing bracket would look silly when fontified alone in the middle of the text. - fontifying only labels is enough to spot quickly a footnotes, and is useful when you want to reuse an already defined label. That being said, I agree that the actual fontification process needs to be tweaked a bit more (i.e. is buggy and not in is final state). Let me improve this during the next week, then, if needed, we will discuss again about it. > Square brackets containing digits inside of footnotes cause some issues. > The primary use for such brackets would be to include LaTeX cite macros > inside of footnotes. I imagine this might be tricky to fix, as [25] > looks exactly like a footnote label. [25] isn't recognized as a footnote label, as LaTeX macros have precedence over footnotes (`org-footnote-at-reference-p' dismisses any footnote matching a part of a LaTeX macro). The problem is that, at the moment, footnote contents are not protected from further processing. Alas, unprotected macros are not seen as macros by LaTeX exporter. One solution would be to protect the contents, but I have first to look at the HTML exporter, as the reason might be different there. There is also a problem to fix with lists within footnotes, as my workaround for that problem doesn't work anymore with the changes I made. Again, I will have a look at all of this during the week to come. Stay tuned ! Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou
