Multi-paragraph endnotes: no line breaks, duplicate links

[pgoussy]

Describe the bug If a footnote/endnote contains multiple <p> tags in the JATS, there appear to be two rendering issues in Janeway:

• The separate JATS <p>s are combined into a single text block in the HTML, rather than being treated as separate paragraphs
• Within that run-on paragraph, placed at what would be the end of each separate <p> from the JATS, Janeway inserts a duplicate caret link ([^]) pointing to the note's callout in the text. This caret link should only appear at the end of the endnote, and there should only be one.

To Reproduce Steps to reproduce the behavior:

1. Go to https://journals.publishing.umich.edu/ergo/plugins/typesetting/preview_galley/article/1118/galley/417/
2. Click on Notes in the floating TOC
3. Scroll down to note 3 ("It may be helpful to think...")
4. Notice that (a) all of the text runs together in a single block, and (b) there are ten separate [^] links throughout the paragraph. This is obviously an extreme example (most multi-paragraph notes only have two or three paras) but it illustrates the issue very effectively.

Here's how this example is tagged in the JATS:

<fn id="FN3">
<label>3</label><p id="P55">It may be helpful to think of <underline>Identity</underline> and <underline>Candidates</underline> as dealing in conditional epistemic probabilities&#x2014;roughly, what one should expect or believe, given one&#x2019;s evidence. This comes to something like the following (for simplicity&#x2019;s sake, we put this in the singular second-person). Where D is the relevant data&#x2014;that is, whatever evidence philosophical theories must take into account&#x2014;and x is a candidate:</p>
<p id="P56"><underline>P-Identity</underline>: If P(x fills the emotional office/D) is high, then either: D is strong evidence that you = x, or you = x</p>
<p id="P57"><underline>P-Candidates:</underline> P(your animal fills the emotional office/D) is high</p>
<p id="P58">Therefore, either D is strong evidence that you = x, or you = x (from P-Identity and P-Candidates, MP)</p>
<p id="P59">The conclusion here is either that animalism is strongly confirmed by the evidence or that animalism is simply true. In either case, the argument supports animalism.</p>
<p id="P60">If you cannot make sense of some candidates being <italic>better</italic> suited for the emotional office than others or of one candidate being the <italic>best</italic>, we offer this alternative formulation of the argument:</p>
<p id="P61"><underline>Identity*</underline>: We are the things that have our emotional states.</p>
<p id="P62"><underline>Candidates*</underline>: The things that have our emotional states are our animals.</p>
<p id="P63">Therefore, we are our animals (from Identity* and Candidates*)</p>
<p id="P64">The conclusion is the same. And nothing we&#x2019;ll say on behalf of our argument will hinge on this difference in formulation.</p>
</fn>

Expected behavior Within a footnote/endnote item, each <p> in the JATS should render as a separate paragraph in the HTML. However, there should only be one caret [^] linking back up to the note's reference in the text, and that link should appear at the very end of the note.

Screenshots

[pgoussy]

Bumping this up! It appears that the duplicate caret links are no longer showing up, but multi-paragraph footnotes are still displaying with all of the <p> tags merged into a contiguous block of text:

[pgoussy]

Bumping this up as we've gotten some author complaints about it, and Apex is claiming that they cannot manually add a line break between these endnote paragraphs. Can this be fixed in the liquid XSLT?

[pgoussy]

Bumping this up again, as we've continued to receive author feedback about multiple footnote paragraphs being merged in the HTML version of their articles.

[ajrbyers]

@pgoussy can you confirm this issue is still present? When testing with the example you supplied I can see it laid out properly.

[pgoussy]

Hmmm, intriguing! I agree, the original example looks correct now. Maybe it has something to do with the block quote formatting?

Here's the article where the error came up recently--see footnote 10, which should be multiple regular paragraphs: https://journals.publishing.umich.edu/ergo/article/id/6790/