On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 4:41 AM, racoon <xraco...@gmx.de> wrote: > On 31.03.2018 12:34, racoon wrote: > >> On 31.03.2018 12:33, racoon wrote: >> >>> On 31.03.2018 12:23, racoon wrote: >>> >>>> On 31.03.2018 00:03, Scott Kostyshak wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 06:00:06PM +0000, José Abílio Matos wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Wednesday, 28 March 2018 20.26.52 WEST racoon wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I'd like to get your take on an enhancement request for changing the >>>>>>> label for footnotes from "foot x" too "fn x". I think the latter is a >>>>>>> much more common abbreviation than the former. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I agree but for me fn remembers FuNction. :-) >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> My first thought was of "function" also. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Come on, there are so much more FUN abbreviations for function. ;) >>>> >>>> Here is some evidence that the abbreviation fn is actually used for >>>> footnotes: >>>> >>>> https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=%22s >>>> ee+fn%22&btnG= >>>> >>> >>> Wikipedia uses the fn abbreviation in the code: >>> >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Footnotes#Footnotes:_embe >>> dding_references >>> >> >> >> https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/fn >> > > https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fn > > https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/us/fn. > > https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/fn > > https://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/dictionaries-thesaur > uses-pictures-and-press-releases/fn > > https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-correct-abbreviation-for-f > ootnote?share=1
I regret that continually sending URLs about what "fn" means will not change my mind that (a) fn comes first as "function" and (b) foot->fn is an improvement. Abbreviations are contextual and these links feel like selection bias to me. Clearly, by just using two letters one can mean a lot of things (my own Google'd URL: https://www.abbreviations.com/FN). Further, I wonder how translations of just the two letters would work. To the remark: > Yes, "footnote" might be better than "foot". But I think there is reason to prefer a short labels since labels clutter the text. Hence, I suggest "fn" or, maybe, "fn.". I wonder why you think brevity is preferable to clarity. I suspect "foot" was attempting to strike a balance. I'd rather see no change than moving too hard in one direction (brevity) versus the other. Further, regarding context: because LaTeX can and is used with mathematics, "fn" could easily be misunderstood as function by a new user and not taken immediately as a footnote even by an experienced one if collapsable mathematical insets were to be used. Regarding cluttering the text: does a label 2 characters wide save that much versus 4, and do 8 characters really clutter that much more significantly? My suggestion if this is truly a bother, set up some way to have it user configured rather than forcing the identifier upon him/her if Riki's suggestion (https://www.lyx.org/trac/ticket/11092#comment:1) isn't satisfactory. Bottom line: I'd rather see no change than one that could lead to increased confusion and translation issues. Thanks, Joel P.S. Said in jest: it's interesting to have a conversation with someone on how to properly name/identify something who goes by the handle "racoon". I imagine a character from Guardians of the Galaxy on the far end of this email (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_Raccoon).
