Footnotes/Endnotes

[m job]

just to keep this topic alive, still need footnotes/endnotes, still waiting....

go serif!

[Patrick Connor]

@m job

 

Welcome to the Serif Affinity forums  

Thanks for the positive encouragement. Hopefully there's lots of new stuff coming this year

[Trevor A]

Patrick
Thank you for the positive response.  I will be looking forward to new things both for Publisher and for Affinity Photo (and probably also for Affinity Designer, once I start using that).
Trevor

[HenrikM]

On 1/22/2022 at 3:26 PM, Trevor A said:

Photography is one of two distinct areas of expertise that I have.  I have been asked to write a book on photography but abandoned using Affinity Publisher the first time I needed to use a footnote!

Yes, Affinity Publisher is definitely lacking in book publishing features. The lack of footnotes, endnotes, and cross-references, are the worst omissions, but the more I work with the software, the more problems I find.

Still, I do not know of any reasonably priced alternative. I do not want to rent Adobe products, and that makes Affinity Publisher the only game in town.

On the other hand, with a bit of luck, Serif is working on fixing the current shortcomings. I hope they do it before I finish my book. 🙂

[Trevor A]

So do I!

[SirPL]

If I still can have two wishes regarding foot/side/end-notes, let me express them:

Right now I'm working on a document which has following numbering of footnotes: ... 15, 16, 17, 17bis, 18, 19... (that's because in 2nd edition a new footnote was added and it must not break old references), so I wish Publisher supports that in some way.

Also, I wish there were an option to define margins of a footnote and to make them dependent on previous character (i.e. make smaller left margin if the footnote occurs after a punctuation mark):

Quote

End of a sentence.¹² But when the footnote occurs in text, have some left margin ¹³ to make it more visible

 

I know, those are very specific cases and I am aware they're very unlikely to be supported right away. But maybe some day...?

[Trevor A]

On occasions (with WORD, not Publisher) when I have needed to add a new footnote and wished it not to disrupt the subsequent numbering, I have done this via the use of manual insertion in the main body of the text of a superscript number that looked like a footnote reference, and extension in the footnote space of the previous footnote, with layout that made it look like a new regular footnote.

A bit of a chore, but it did work, it looked right, and the reader would not be aware that it was achieved in a way that was different from "regular" footnotes.

Naturally, this is hopefully a rare occurrence.  Normally, when I add to existing documents, if further footnotes are required, I am grateful that WORD can automatically renumber all subsequent footnotes and adjust the layout as required.  This is what I need Affinity Publisher to do.

[fde101]

1 hour ago, SirPL said:

Right now I'm working on a document which has following numbering of footnotes: ... 15, 16, 17, 17bis, 18, 19... (that's because in 2nd edition a new footnote was added and it must not break old references), so I wish Publisher supports that in some way.

This may be a relatively rare use case, but it is still a very interesting one to consider, and finally gives us something other than the pointless begging for the feature (which we have been told repeatedly is coming) to discuss.

One way I could see achieving this would be to add a "locked" property to each footnote/endnote that locked the reference to that footnote or endnote so that it would never change.  A "lock all" / "unlock all" feature would then change the "locked" property of all footnotes/endnotes that existed at that time (possibly within a selection or a story).

If a section of a story was deleted which contained a locked footnote or endnote, it could be replaced with an invisible marker which represented the still-locked (now invisible) footnote or endnote to ensure it was not reused later.  For example, if I had footnotes from 1 to 10 and locked them, then deleted a portion of the text containing footnote 5, then if I were to insert another footnote between footnote 4 and where footnote 5 used to be, I would get 4bis (or other selected numbering scheme - 4.1, 4a, whatever) instead of 5 being reused; similarly if I inserted between where 5 used to be and where 6 is, I would get 5bis (5.1, 5a, ...).

Newly added footnotes would be created unlocked, so they could still adjust dynamically as the content was modified, but leaving the existing ones untouched.  When it comes time for the 3rd edition, you could do a "lock all" to prevent the new 2nd edition footnotes from changing.

 

Here is another obscure situation to consider: multiple instances of the same footnote.  That is, if I have an existing footnote - call it 2, and I have another place in the text where I would want a footnote with the same text for footnote or endnote 2, it would be nice to insert another reference to footnote 2 in the text rather than adding another distinct footnote - but not just as superscripted text, so that if it is not locked and I insert another footnote before the first instance of footnote 2, both instances would be renumbered to 3.

[Old Bruce]

5 hours ago, SirPL said:

(that's because in 2nd edition a new footnote was added and it must not break old references), so I wish Publisher supports that in some way.

That is to my mind wrong thinking. References are always going to be broken by new editions, that is why the publication's edition number is included in the reference.

[Pyanepsion]

19 hours ago, SirPL said:

Right now I'm working on a document which has following numbering of footnotes: ... 15, 16, 17, 17bis, 18, 19... (that's because in 2nd edition a new footnote was added and it must not break old references

The first edition is not a sacrosanct edition!

In a new edition, text is added, text is removed, and text is moved. The same applies to the notes, which are also added, removed or moved.

Should the order of the old numbering of the corresponding notes be respected?

Quote

15, 21, 52, 37, 16, 17, 17bis, 17 tres, 17 quator […] 17 quinquaginta ,18, 19 […]

No, of course not, because that would be a headache without a name. All notes are therefore renumbered in relation to the new text.

The said note will then be referenced in academic works with the edition number [2022 A, notes 17 and 18], or if the second edition is used [2022 B, note 17, and 19]. Note 18 become 19.

You can also number the notes not from the beginning to the end of the book, but by chapter or other division. This makes it possible to keep most of the same numbers through successive editions.

 

[Trevor A]

Agreed.  Unless a book is extremely short, restarting note numbers from 1 in each new chapter is much to be preferred.

[Trevor A]

Thank you! I thought that I had posted it in the right forum and in the right thread!  I will try again!

[fde101]

On 2/14/2022 at 2:25 PM, Old Bruce said:

References are always going to be broken by new editions

On 2/15/2022 at 3:52 AM, Pyanepsion said:

The first edition is not a sacrosanct edition!

In a new edition, text is added, text is removed, and text is moved.

 

Something to chew on: manuals for older computer platforms (particularly mainframes, as well as Multics and other multi-user environments) often came as punched sheets in large 3-ring binders.  These manuals often had hundreds of pages, and small changes were required between releases.

To accommodate these relatively small changes which would happen somewhat frequently, the binders were helpful in that the company which produced the software would send punched pages with only the changes and additions, along with instructions concerning where to insert or replace the pages when updating from the prior version.

When new pages were added to the manual, rather than replace potentially hundreds of pages to maintain the page numbers, they instead wound up with fractional page numbers - so if inserting a new page between 55/56 and 57/58, they might number it 56.5/56.6 for example.

This method would significantly reduce the cost and wastage as they would not need to reprint the entire manual for each small update which would be released.

If footnotes had been used in a manual such as this (which I have not actually seen done, but just hypothetically at this point), they would run into the same issue with numbering those.  They would need to replace pages through the end of the manual because one footnote was inserted on a replaced page unless accommodation was made for numbers in between existing ones.

While this particular situation would likely be extremely rare at best today, it may provide an example of a situation where being able to maintain existing numbering while inserting references would be important, not only for footnotes/endnotes, but also for page numbers (perhaps a similar scheme to what I described above for footnotes/endnotes could be considered for those as well?).

 

I'm not sure what the exact situation of @SirPL is, whether there is legitimate benefit to maintaining the references or it is a trumped-up management decision which simply needs to be lived with, but either way these are use cases which could be accommodated with a few software features that would give Publisher an advantage in these now obscure (but once semi-common) situations without creating difficulty for the more normal use cases, so it is still something worth considering.

[Trevor A]

Thank you for sharing with us this uncommon historical curiosity.  If they had started the page numbering for each section at 1, they would have reduced the number of problems substantially.

For us in the present/future, restarting footnotes at 1 for each chapter is common and clearly minimises problems.  However, as well as giving an indication which edition we are using when we quote from a printed book, best practice indicates that we should indicate the date when we consulted a web page from which we wish to quote.  This does accommodate the fact that the precise details of some web pages can change over time, normally to fill in gaps, correct errors or provide further references.

A need for subdivisions of footnote numbers does seem to be a somewhat specialist requirement.

[Old Bruce]

@fde101, thanks for the trip down memory lane. I do remember the binders. I don't recall any footnotes (I always want to say feetnote even though I know it is wrong) in them but I do recall pages with the words "This Page Intentionally Blank" on them. 

For the most part anytime I have had addenda issued it has been in a standalone publication.

The numbering of notes is a convention, or rather a series of conventions, one from each publisher or style manual. Somewhere I have a list of suitable symbols and their order for use with footnotes. Asterisk before Dagger before Pilcrow.... Back in the day papers would just have more and more asterisks would get added. 

[PaulEC]

22 hours ago, fde101 said:

Something to chew on: manuals for older computer platforms (particularly mainframes, as well as Multics and other multi-user environments) often came as punched sheets in large 3-ring binders.  These manuals often had hundreds of pages, and small changes were required between releases.

To accommodate these relatively small changes which would happen somewhat frequently, the binders were helpful in that the company which produced the software would send punched pages with only the changes and additions, along with instructions concerning where to insert or replace the pages when updating from the prior version.

When new pages were added to the manual, rather than replace potentially hundreds of pages to maintain the page numbers, they instead wound up with fractional page numbers - so if inserting a new page between 55/56 and 57/58, they might number it 56.5/56.6 for example.

This method would significantly reduce the cost and wastage as they would not need to reprint the entire manual for each small update which would be released.

I don't think it was that unusual (before digital files, in the days of hardcopy,) to have manuals and other technical/legal/etc documentation in some form of binder, so that it could be updated, without having to reprint whole volumes. Back in the '70s I worked, briefly, in a Benefits office; one of my regular jobs was replacing odd pages in binders (a cupboard full of them!) containing all the "rules, regulations and legislation" relating to Social Security payments.

[Wosven]

  

On 2/14/2022 at 2:31 PM, SirPL said:

Right now I'm working on a document which has following numbering of footnotes: ... 15, 16, 17, 17bis, 18, 19...

 

Why not using a second Paragraph style for those notes, and restart the paragraph numbering?

Something like this:

OLexample.afpub

[fde101]

19 hours ago, Trevor A said:

Thank you for sharing with us this uncommon historical curiosity.  If they had started the page numbering for each section at 1, they would have reduced the number of problems substantially.

What you may not realize is that individual sections for a manual like this could be hundreds of pages long and need to have only individual pages replaced or added.  For example, a manual listing all of the API calls for a particular operating system may have had a section with the calls listed alphabetically or under categories and describing each call.  As there could be hundreds or even thousands of such API calls, the need to occasionally add one in the middle or to expand on the description of one if it changed with a given release may have resulted in a new page added toward the beginning or the middle.

[Johnnyyyy]

Really hope footnotes will be implemented. I bought publisher without realising it was missing this feature. I'm doing a history magazine layout at the moment that requires footnotes, started the job in Affinity so I will finish, but it costs me so much extra time now, not worth the money I saved on the cancelling the Adobe subscription.

Really don't want to get back to adobe! but if this feature is missing I will have to... 

[Trevor A]

Sorry to hear of the problems that you are encountering because of the absence of this feature.  I fully understand - from experience with the layout of a book! - the tremendous time implications of manually having to change layout to accommodate the presence of footnotes or changes in footnotes during the editing process.  There is also a massive increase in the risk of missing a change somewhere and getting all subsequent footnote numbers wrong.  And for me as a relative beginner with Publisher, there was the difficulty in getting truly standardised spacing at the bottoms of pages that had footnotes, the placing of the dividing line, its length, etc.  It is of course possible to get this right, but this took me a LOT of extra time.

It is amazing (shocking, disappointing, sad, etc., etc.) that we are still having such a discussion in 2022, DECADES after automatic incorporation of footnotes became STANDARD in Word and other applications.

[PaoloT]

On 2/21/2022 at 7:48 AM, Trevor A said:

It is amazing (shocking, disappointing, sad, etc., etc.) that we are still having such a discussion in 2022, DECADES after automatic incorporation of footnotes became STANDARD in Word and other applications.

But, is there a reason for not using Word for doing a book, instead of going to Affinity Publisher (or any other layout program)?

Paolo

 

[Marathon1908]

Word was never designed to handle images and text, and does it badly in all sorts of ways, which is why Microsoft developed Publisher.  You will know that if you add additional text to a page with an image on it Word does not behave consistently and often pushes the image onto the next page and won't let you fill the space with text, just as an example.  As with previous books I am composing in Word and not worrying about the numerous layout issues.  When it comes to the final edit I shall transfer it all to MS Publisher to get it print ready.  The problem is, working on a Mac I shall have to do it on an old laptop because there is no MS Publisher for Mac.  Hence if Affinity can sort out footnotes and indexing and make their program text-friendly as well as image-friendly it will be a real boon.  I haven't found a decent publishing program for Mac at a reasonable price.  Affinity was my big hope.

[Trevor A]

Paolo

I compose most text in WORD, but WORD can just not cope with the requirements of layout for a book with illustrations and it cannot as far as I am aware implement colour profiles and guarantee accurate colour output.  It also will not produce printer's marks for a professional colour printing operation.  As regards layout, WORD "has its own mind" (!) and takes almost total control of layout away from the person preparing the book for printing.  Many options in a publisher program are just not available or possible.

In all areas other than the one that is the subject of this thread, Affinity Publisher is MASSIVELY SUPERIOR to MS WORD.  It can produce files of any page, number of pages, file size in full PDF/X-4 format with bleeds, so that I can place images (or a background colour) right to the edge of the page and beyond it, and printer's marks, so that the bleeds can be trimmed, giving a totally professional output.

Trevor

[DrBob53]

You may get on better with Libre Office. When I last used it for serious work it handled positioning of pictures and tables much better than Word. Ignore the mess it makes of letter spacing on screen. It's related to errors in sub pixel positioning. Looks much better when you print to pdf. I don't think Publisher does footnotes. Hopefully when footnotes are ready in AP, imports from Libre Office will be reasonaby straight forward (no - I dont have any inside information).

[Trevor A]

Dr Bob
Thank you for the suggestion.  I did once have it on a previous computer.
Trevor