Footnotes/Endnotes

[rai44]

3 hours ago, PaoloT said:

The iPad version has been announced (semi-officially?) for this summer.

Not anymore. The release date quietly changed from “this summer” to “coming soon”, which could be tomorrow or who-knows-when.

Edit, erased the rest

[rai44]

12 hours ago, Arte said:

Affinity (Designer) was making inroads into the AEC world

Thanks for the heads-up; I found the article (published February 7) you’re talking about here

https://aecmag.com/technology/serif-affinity-for-aec-firms/

At some point the author writes Version 2 of the suite is due out in 2022 and promises to bring a slew of new capabilities. One customer who is beta testing V2 told me it will also make the switch from Adobe ‘even easier’ (…)

[DrBob53]

If there is a chage to upgrade to v2, I hope there is a generous upgrade offer for those who have posted in this forum.

[rai44]

4 hours ago, DrBob53 said:

If there is a chage to upgrade to v2, I hope there is a generous upgrade offer for those who have posted in this forum.

Hmm, I don’t think would be fair; some users here will get V2 for free 🤔🫣

Edit - this is obviously a (bad) joke. I support the 2.0 paid version with all my heart. 

Edited April 28, 2022 by iuli

[graphandwriting]

21 minutes ago, DrBob53 said:

If there is a chage to upgrade to v2, I hope there is a generous upgrade offer for those who have posted in this forum.

 

2 minutes ago, iuli said:

Hmm, I don’t think would be fair; some users here will get V2 for free 🤔🫣

Nothing that is written about hopes for upgrade offers here in these forums will ever change, not even so slightly influence, the pricing policy of Serif and what they decide about it. Wasted energy by creating such posts.

[LondonSquirrel]

22 minutes ago, DrBob53 said:

If there is a chage to upgrade to v2, I hope there is a generous upgrade offer for those who have posted in this forum.

I am sure there will be a charge. But I'm fine with that. I've had free updates for several years, and I don't expect that forever.

While it is fair to say in some cases that the updates have been a bit underwhelming, that is not the whole story. It tends to mean that the features we (that is we individually, not we as a non-existent 'all users' group) would like to see have not been implemented. I have certainly benefitted from these updates at times. I praise the 'select same fill colour' feature in AD which, when I need it, saves me hours of time. Whether I value my time by £ or cups of coffee, it's not a zero value. So this one feature alone is already worth the cost of an upgrade.

[Patrick Connor]

5 minutes ago, graphandwriting said:

Wasted energy by creating such posts.

Once a thread gets to 44 pages long most posts are unlikely to add anything hugely significant, yours for example. I think that users are being pragmatic that this feature is so popular that many would be willing to pay for it to be included in a future version. To that end they are hoping there would be some discount. It is just a bit of fun.

[graphandwriting]

8 minutes ago, Patrick Connor said:

Once a thread gets to 44 pages long most posts are unlikely to add anything hugely significant, yours for example. I think that users are being pragmatic that this feature is so popular that many would be willing to pay for it to be included in a future version. To that end they are hoping there would be some discount. It is just a bit of fun.

Honestly, I don't really understand what you want to say. Your post does not seem to carry any hugely significant meaning either. Which is fine in my case, but since you are staff, it for the first time starts to make me wonder how Serif staff is using their time... Should you not rather be programming or something to help to company and software move foreward?

[Patrick Connor]

3 minutes ago, graphandwriting said:

Should you not rather be programming or something to help to company and software move foreward?

Perhaps, but I am having a day off today. Sorry to disappoint. I will get my nose back to the grindstone soon enough

[graphandwriting]

3 minutes ago, Patrick Connor said:

Perhaps, but I am having a day off today. Sorry to disappoint. I will get my nose back to the grindstone soon enough

Ok, didn't have that on my radar. Learned something new. Then I wish you good relaxation from work while reading the Serif forums. 😉

[Jim Slade]

If there is a charge to upgrade V2, I hope there will be come inexpensive upgrade path.

I have not been able to use V1 at all because of a lack of footnotes and the inability to merge separate sourxce files. I bought V1 in the hope that these deficiencies would be fixed soon.

[walt.farrell]

22 minutes ago, Jim Slade said:

and the inability to merge separate sourxce files. 

Merging separate files works, so I'm curious what method you're trying, and what problems you have.

[Jim Slade]

To merge from several separate source files; not to combine files into one big one. When I try to import my separate book files, I get a lack of resources dialog box then publisher crashes.

[Old Bruce]

6 minutes ago, Jim Slade said:

To merge from several separate source files; not to combine files into one big one. When I try to import my separate book files, I get a lack of resources dialog box then publisher crashes.

You should post a bug report in the relevant Publisher Bug forum.

[PaoloT]

Those that in this thread have doubted that footnotes will come with v2, will pay double!

Paolo

 

[Arte]

On 4/28/2022 at 10:45 PM, PaoloT said:

Those that in this thread have doubted that footnotes will come with v2, will pay double!

Paolo

 

And those who expected it will be included in V2 would then pay half if it is not included? 😉

If only one of them could be included I hope it will be endnotes because for me they're a bit more convenient lay-out wise than footnotes.

[Trevor A]

They may be more convenient for the person or the program preparing the layout, but they are far less reader-friendly, which should surely be the ultimate objective of every (human or machine) publisher of a publication.

[PaulEC]

33 minutes ago, Trevor A said:

They may be more convenient for the person or the program preparing the layout, but they are far less reader-friendly, which should surely be the ultimate objective of every (human or machine) publisher of a publication.

I'm not sure this is always true. For example, if the footnotes are an important explanation of something, it is quite handy to have them on the same page. However, if they are just a reference to the source of the information, or something that doesn't really add to the "flow" of the text, I think I'd rather have them all together at the end. When footnotes/endnotes are eventually added you really need to have the choice. (Depending on the layout of the publication side notes can be quite handy as well!)

[Pyanepsion]

On 27 and 28 March I explained the historical rationale for the different kinds of notes. All types of notes are actually useful depending on the nature of the document:

– Endnote of an element: text box, table, column, page, chapter, article, section, book, volume.

– Page note: at the bottom (footnote), side (marginal), in the middle, between columns, between lines.

[Trevor A]

1 hour ago, PaulEC said:

I'm not sure this is always true. For example, if the footnotes are an important explanation of something, it is quite handy to have them on the same page. However, if they are just a reference to the source of the information, or something that doesn't really add to the "flow" of the text, I think I'd rather have them all together at the end. When footnotes/endnotes are eventually added you really need to have the choice. (Depending on the layout of the publication side notes can be quite handy as well!)

I do not disagree with your comments.  However, I am aware of two relevant factors:
1.  Many readers do not read footnotes, especially if they are not on the same page.
2. Some writers try to hide at the back of the book footnotes that contain information that undermines their arguments, when they feel that they would lose all credibility if they missed out the information completely.

I don't wish to deny such writers the chance to play such tricks, but a program that does not permit at least the option of footnotes on the same page is really not delivering what it needs to deliver.

[PaulEC]

6 minutes ago, Trevor A said:

I don't wish to deny such writers the chance to play such tricks, but a program that does not permit at least the option of footnotes on the same page is really not delivering what it needs to deliver.

I wasn't saying that there should not be footnotes, just that it's nice to have a choice of footnotes, endnotes and/or side notes! In particular I dislike having either many footnotes, or long ones, if they take up a large percentage of the page. I have read books where the footnotes took up more of the page than the actual text! In those cases I (as a reader) would much rather they were placed as endnotes instead. The thing is that there are many reasons for "notes" and the content can vary enormously, so I think the author should have the choice.

[fde101]

Consider also the case where you might want to have the *same* note text referenced in 50 places spread across 30 pages (reiterating earlier comments pointing out the value of supporting multiple references to the same note).  In this case, if you are using footnotes on the pages themselves, do you place the note at the bottom of the first page to reference it, the last page to reference it, a random page that references it (or whichever one provides the best visual balance of text area to note area?), or repeat it on all pages that reference it?  (My suggestion would be to provide all of these options, in the same place where you decide if they should be presented as footnotes, endnotes, margin-notes, between-columns-notes, tooltip-notes, whatever-notes...)

With endnotes this is much simpler, you only need to include it once and it is obvious where to find it, and the space which is consumed in the document by the notes is appropriately minimized.

Each has its pros and cons and could be useful in different cases.

[Arte]

11 hours ago, Trevor A said:

They may be more convenient for the person or the program preparing the layout, but they are far less reader-friendly, which should surely be the ultimate objective of every (human or machine) publisher of a publication.

To be clear, I want both footnotes and endnotes, but for the kind of publications I do footnotes can have a negative impact on lay-out because of the space they may occupy on the page depending on number and length of the footnotes, so endotes are more convenient in that case. In case only footnotes or only endotes can be implemented upon release, then I would prefer endnotes to be implemented first. Others may prefer footnotes to be implemented first in that case, so maybe a poll might be useful in that case.

Though it would make sense to implement them both when they are made available, but you never know how things may go.

[fde101]

35 minutes ago, Arte said:

for the kind of publications I do footnotes can have a negative impact on lay-out because of the space they may occupy on the page depending on number and length of the footnotes

Pseudorandom likely bad idea of the day:

I wonder sometimes if a feature that would allow a large number of footnotes to be balanced across pages before/after the one the notes are from would be appropriate in some cases.  If you have a tiny number (or no) footnotes on pages 15 and 17 but there are a large number on page 16, then some of the footnotes from 16 would be relocated to page 15 and some to page 17 to help balance them out a bit better...

[walt.farrell]

28 minutes ago, fde101 said:

 If you have a tiny number (or no) footnotes on pages 15 and 17 but there are a large number on page 16, then some of the footnotes from 16 would be relocated to page 15 and some to page 17 to help balance them out a bit better...

But the reader expects to find them on the page where they're referenced. You can't simply move them to a different page.