Closed minamotorin closed 2 years ago
Thank you. I corrected the calculation of \jlreq@footnoteindent
in 60dce18 .
I keep the code on \jlreq@makefntext
because the current implementation follows 4.2.5 of JLReq (if I'm not mistaken). It says nothing on the length of the footnote number. It only says about the space after footnote number and the indent of the second line. The picture after 4.2.5.d is useful.
First, thanks for fixing.
I keep the code on \jlreq@makefntext because the current implementation follows 4.2.5 of JLReq (if I'm not mistaken). It says nothing on the length of the footnote number. It only says about the space after footnote number and the indent of the second line. The picture after 4.2.5.d is useful.
Did you mean Figure 256? It seems to me the length of footnote number of this figure is just one em and the character positions are aligned (the second line and the last line are exceptions). But I understand JLReq says nothing about this and respect your decision. I'll patch myself.
By the way, how about \jlreq@footnote@rulewidth
? (Figure 251.)
It seems to me the length of footnote number of this figure is just one em
I agree. The problem seems, for me ,that the natural number of the footnote number is not 1zw
.
\documentclass{jlreq}
{
\footnotesize
\setbox0=\hbox{1)}
\showthe\wd0% -> 7.55566pt
}
\begin{document}
\end{document}
Maybe the current implementation is not the best one, but I do not have a good solution.
By the way, how about
\jlreq@footnote@rulewidth
?
Thank you. It has the same problem. I fixed it. 160e78b
It has the same problem. I fixed it. 160e78b
Thanks. It seems that the \jlreq@footnote@rulewidth
of 160e78b is the same length for \onecolumn
and \twocolumn
. Is this a specification? Curiously, length of the footnoterule changes with minipage
.
The problem seems, for me ,that the natural number of the footnote number is not
1zw
.
I think so too.
Thank you. I forgot \onecolumn
command. I hope 7fa004a works.
7fa004a seems work fine, thanks!
Hello, thanks for creating wonderful class! It's important to have more choices.
Issue description
When I use
twocolumn
class option,\jlreq@footnoteindent
will be calculated as same as onecolumn and sometimes line length of footnote is not integer multiple of\zw
of\footnotesize
.Example code
If a footnote has more than three lines, there may be differences of position of characters between the first line, the last line, and other lines. Last line is normal.
The other lines shift is due to incorrect
\jlreq@footnoteindent
. And the first line shift is due to width of\@thefnmark
is not integer multiple of\zw
of\footnotesize
.My patch
A patch for current version is as follows (I'm sorry to depend on etoolbox):
I think hooking into
\onecolumn
and\twocolumn
would be more convenient.My codes and images of this issue are CC0.
Thanks.