Function over form on this one – we are relaying information here, not sweeping it out of sight to make the page less 'cluttered'. Seriously? Giving the information on the page is way more user-friendly than having to constantly refer to another page. That worked far better than bottom of the page footnotes or endnotes. I can't do that in ID.
Any use of a footnote, of which the Markdown syntax is footnote content, will automatically be converted to a sidenote. There is a wide margin to provide ample room for sidenotes and small figures. Untangling Tolkien, my day-by-day chronology of Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings was done in Framemaker, which allowed me create the equivalent of footnotes for references to the source in LOTR in a sidebar alongside the text to which it applies. One of the most prominent and distinctive features of this style is the extensive use of sidenotes. I would, however, agree with those who'd like to see footnotes handled in a more powerful way. Endnotes far away could be used to give references that most people don't read. Footnotes could be used at the bottom of a page to clarify ideas.
And being able to have both in the same document would be handy. In todays world, their appearance at the bottom of a page is seen as clutter by most readers. In the era before computers, endnotes were far easier to typeset. Visit any university library and you'll find that endnotes replaced footnotes long ago, perhaps in the 1950s. In my experience, readers just get annoyed by having to go to the end of the book (or worse, to the end of the chapter in multi-authored volumes).Īdd me to those voting for footnotes and endnotes, but with a strong stress on the later. > In today's world, their appearance at the bottom of a page is seen as clutter by most readers. Footnotes are still more labour-intensive than endnotes, but the difference in effort is not nearly as big as it used to be. Endnotes hung on for non-academic texts and in texts published by penny-pinching publishers, but nowadays footnotes are preferred by many. That's why notes were set as endnotes at some stage. > In the era before computers, endnotes were far easier to typeset. > Visit any university library and you'll find that endnotes replaced footnotes long ago, perhaps in the 1950s.Ĭomplete nonsense. And users should be able to define their own sequence and appearance of note symbols (asterisk, pilcrow, dagger, double dagger, paragraph symbol, etc.). In the documentation of the tufte-book class it is written that: Any footnotes will automatically be converted to sidenotes. It should also be possible (as it isn't in InDesign), to set the first footnote in a text as an uncued note. That way each story can have its own numbering style and start number. Footnotes are at the document level in InDesign, they should be at the level of the story. Please, Affinity, whatever you do, don't look at InDesign's notes. > Hope you can implement it in a similar way like in InDesign. I'll add my vote for footnote and endnote support.
0 kommentar(er)
