Re: [O] [bug, patch, ox] INCLUDE and footnotes

[Nicolas Goaziou]

Rasmus <address@hidden> writes:

> Clearly the current situation is not satisfactory ("You can use :lines,
> but only if no footnotes are present. . .  IOW, :lines supports a subset
> of Org syntax.").
>
> I prefer converting [fn:N] references to [fn::FOOTNOTE] (see my other
> email).  Any obvious downsides?

Yes: inline and regular footnotes are not equivalent. For example,
a regular footnote can contain a table, a plain list... So this is not
an option here.

I think required definitions should be extracted from the included file
and inserted at the end of the source file, without any footnote
section. However, it would be nice to store associations between files
and footnote labels in, e.g., a hash table, in order to avoid inserting
multiple times the same footnote.


Regards,