Closed ajmisra closed 1 year ago
Well, it is not so eays to solve, as we must deal with the fact that people can reset footnotecounter, and also that a same footnote can be called multiple time.
So please try the branch issue954_hyperref_footnote_manuel
I just tried the new branch and it works perfectly! Thank you so much, Maïeul. This is great!
Please don't close the branch. I have to do the release...
Oops, sorry about that. I hit the wrong button. :)
No problem. The package is ready to be sent on CTAN.
Please validate the answer in stackexchange.
Unfortunatly, there is a but in your use case, when dealing with footnote inside environment. I will release soon a v2.39.5
That's awesome. After writing to you, the only problem I discovered with the branch issue954_hyperref_footnote_manuel code was that the backreference in the xltabular environment doesn't work. The \footnoteXmark
in the xltabular environment pointed to the right footnote, but the backreference of the \footnoteXtext
didn't point back to the mark. Not a big problem for me, but I thought I'd mention it here.
Yes, that is the bug I though. You could have told me : I wouldn't have sent on CTAN a buged version to send again a fixed version...
(It is a just a problem of variable portees... I solve it now. Running the tests, and then release.
I'm sorry I didn't notice the bug: it seems only to affect the xltabular environment, when I checked with the paracol environment (which is what I use extensively in my paper), everything works fine. Perhaps, it a xltabular problem.
EDIT: That's awesome that you have solved it! :)
Well, I guess that xtabular does some very tricky things...
I guess it stores the contains of each cell in individual macro, or something like this. And so local variable (as the identifier of the targe) can't work when the typeset is done.
Quite possibly so. Also, I am not really sure if reledmac needs to support xltabular footnotes (if it is too much hassle to make them fully compatible). Table footnotes are anyway problematic things and should be avoided. I've had to use them twice in a 100+page paper, and even then the footnotemark and text are on the same page, so I don't really mind the problem. Everywhere else, in all the other environments I've' used it in, they work perfectly so I am very grateful to you for your help! :)
Yes, and reledmac is not designed to use footnoteA
outside of critical edition. It is a just a +.
Table footnotes are anyway problematic things and should be avoided.
Yes, indeed, but sometime we have no choice.
Also, I am not really sure if reledmac needs to support xltabular footnotes (if it is too much hassle to make them fully compatible Now, it is juste 3 lines to change, juste let the variable global. SHould not have any side effect, as there variable are defined only once. Now my computer run the tests... wait and see.
well, and tests works. So now, the handbook the final release process is running...
awesome!!
Hi Maïeul, I just tried the reledmac 2023/07/21 v2.39.5 release via CTAN and also the github master release of ledmac-master, but the problem of \footnoteXmark
and \footnoteXtext
back-referencing in the xltabular environment still persists. The test.tex file doesn't give proper back references for the 2 and 3 footnotes back to the marks in the xltabular location. As I mentioned, I don't particularly mind it, but I thought I'd bring this to your attention. Thanks again.
ho, you are right... the target point is correct in the footnote, but the anchor is not set well in the main test...
so.. i will try something, and wait some week before releasing.
That's great! Thank so much for all your work with this, a lot of us really appreciate it! :)
But at least, it don't go back to the first page, as in 2.39.4
indeed!
Well, it is the security and double anchor which cause trouble...
Well, as engine are able to deal with the double anchor, ignoring the last one, I suppress internal security.
Please try branch issue_954_bis
That's fantastic! I just checked and now it works!! Great job, mate!
So releaser later in the summer.
That's perfect! Cheers :)
Version
reledmac dev branch: hyperrer_pb
TeX Engine
XeLateX
Regression
As far as I know, it's the first time its been pointed out.
Description
Different
footnoteXmark
, when applied separately from their correspondingfootnoteXtext
, produce the correct hyperlink (i.e.,footnotemarkX
), but the actualfootnoteXtext
are back-referenced (viabodyfootmarkX
) to the same lastfootnoteXmark
.NB: This follows the discussion on TeX Stack Exchange (here)
Minimal Working Example
Workaround
None thus far.