From: Alan G I. <ai...@am...> - 2010-03-09 19:14:49
|
I need endnotes. Currently the LaTeX writer does not play nicely with the endnotes package. (Every endnote is numbered 0.) Is this easily fixable? The endnotes package is a *very* standard was to get endnotes in LaTeX. Alan Isaac PS I recall an earlier discussion of this, but I cannot find it. Sorry. But my recollection was that at the time there was no quick fix. |
From: Guenter M. <mi...@us...> - 2010-03-09 20:15:40
|
On 2010-03-09, Alan G Isaac wrote: > I need endnotes. > Currently the LaTeX writer does not play nicely with the endnotes package. > (Every endnote is numbered 0.) Is this easily fixable? Not that I know of. > The endnotes package is a *very* standard was to get endnotes in LaTeX. However, rst is a very non-standard input system for LaTeX. Especially the way footnotes are defined makes this difficult. However, you can consider using a custom role. > PS I recall an earlier discussion of this, > but I cannot find it. Sorry. But my > recollection was that at the time there > was no quick fix. Indeed. It is, however, still on my TODO list. Günter |
From: Alan G I. <ai...@am...> - 2010-03-09 20:46:10
|
>> The endnotes package is a*very* standard was to get endnotes in LaTeX. On 3/9/2010 3:13 PM, Guenter Milde wrote: > However, rst is a very non-standard input system for LaTeX. Especially > the way footnotes are defined makes this difficult. Maybe the rst2latex writer is trying to be too clever, and the result is a loss of functionality? (E.g., a standard package like endnotes.sty no longer works.) In any case, how about a --use-latex-footnotes option? (This would use the \footnote command instead of the writer's replacements for this.) That would make things easy ... Alan |
From: Guenter M. <mi...@us...> - 2010-03-10 07:33:59
|
On 2010-03-09, Alan G Isaac wrote: > On 3/9/2010 3:13 PM, Guenter Milde wrote: >> However, rst is a very non-standard input system for LaTeX. Especially >> the way footnotes are defined makes this difficult. > Maybe the rst2latex writer is trying to be too clever, > and the result is a loss of functionality? Definitely not! > (E.g., a standard package like endnotes.sty no longer works.) > In any case, how about a > --use-latex-footnotes > option? (This would use the \footnote command > instead of the writer's replacements for this.) > That would make things easy ... Easy for you. However, footnotes in Docutils are defined separate from the footnote-reference. The \footnote command must be used a) at the place of the footnote-reference, but b) with the content of the footnote. The tricky point is to know the content of the footnote when the footnote-reference is encountered. But we had this discussion already... Günter |
From: Alan G I. <ai...@am...> - 2010-03-10 13:02:37
|
On 3/10/2010 2:33 AM, Guenter Milde wrote: > in Docutils are defined separate from > the footnote-reference. The \footnote command must be used > > a) at the place of the footnote-reference, but > b) with the content of the footnote. > > The tricky point is to know the content of the footnote when the > footnote-reference is encountered. I understand that, but I do not remotely understand the internals. Aren't both parsed before the writer does any writing? Is there no structured access to the contents? (At this point I am just satisfying my curiosity about what makes this hard ...) After looking at endnotes.sty, I strongly suspect something very similar to \DUfootnotemark and \DUfootnotetext can be used successfully, rather than bringing the reference and content together. However, if the latter can be readily done, there is still a reason: it will be expected by many journals. Cheers, Alan |