Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaz...@gmail.com> 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).
Yes, I can see how overriding the fontification of links might be an issue. FWIW, auctex/font-latex provides a nice example of the behavior I have in mind. The face inside of the footnote macro overrides some faces, but not others. Leading whitespace indented, multi-line footnotes is not 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. Could we perhaps provide an option to fontify the brackets, if only to preserve the traditional behavior? I use footnotes that look like this.[fn:6592605c] I find them much easier to scan visually when the brackets and "fn:" are also highlighted. > 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. Indeed. It was the html exporter that treated the brackets as a footnote. The LaTeX exporter, by contrast, escaped the curly brackets. > Again, I will have a look at all of this during the week to come. Stay > tuned ! Thanks! Matt
