Initially quoting me, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
>> Missing number, treated as zero.
>> ...ect\footnotemark[\protect\ref{foot:div}]}
>> A number should have been here; I inserted "0".
>> (If you can't figure out why I needed to see a number,
>> look up `wierd error' in the index to The TeXbook.)
>>"Wierd error" indeed. I protected the original footnote in its section
>>heading. I protected the label within the footnote. I protected the
>>footnotemark in its section heading, and I protected its optional reference
>>argument. My previous experience is that a \ref to a label in a previous
>>footnote will produce the number footnotemark needs.
>>Is this just not possible, or can someone show me how to get what I'm looking
>>for?
>You should put protect _only_ before \footnotemark, namely
>\protect\footnotemark[\ref{foot:div}]
Yes. Following my usual procedure for this sort of experimental computer
science, I first protected everything in sight, one thing at a time, until
something good happened. As soon as I put the protect on footnotemark, I went
from six errors down to one. Unfortunately, that one last error never went
away. Ultimately, I've removed all the extra protects, and the one error
remains.
For what it's worth, this is Lyx 1.1.5fix1.
--
M/S 258-5 | 1024-bit PGP fingerprint: | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
NASA Ames Research Center | 41 B0 89 0A 8F 94 6C 59 | (650) 604-4416
Moffett Field, CA 94035-1000 | 7C 80 10 20 25 C7 2F E6 | FAX: (650) 604-4377
We each earn what freedom of speech we defend for those who most offend us.
