Reading the USFM documentation, I have several questions around quotes.
First question is : what is the semantic difference between fq and fk ?
The documentation says :
fq : "A quotation from the current scripture text translation for which the note is being provided. "
fk : "The specific keyword/term from the text for which the footnote is being provided."
In both case, it's the extract from the current scripture which the note applies to.
The only difference I understand from that text is that fk seems to allow only a single word whereas fq allows any quotation (be it a single word or a phrase) but that seems very arbitrary. In which case would it be correct to use \fk but wrong to use \fq , and reciprocally ?
Second question is : What quote elements are available in footnotes, and for which use case ?
In the documentation's "footnote content" elements section, the following are defined :
fq: for the exact quote that the note applies to.
fk: apparently same but for a single word
fqa: for an alternate translation of that quote
What about quotes from other texts ? Is it valid to use \qt (possibly in a nested form +qt) within footnotes for this use case ?
Hi,
Reading the USFM documentation, I have several questions around quotes.
First question is : what is the semantic difference between fq and fk ? The documentation says :
In both case, it's the extract from the current scripture which the note applies to. The only difference I understand from that text is that fk seems to allow only a single word whereas fq allows any quotation (be it a single word or a phrase) but that seems very arbitrary. In which case would it be correct to use \fk but wrong to use \fq , and reciprocally ?
Second question is : What quote elements are available in footnotes, and for which use case ? In the documentation's "footnote content" elements section, the following are defined :
What about quotes from other texts ? Is it valid to use \qt (possibly in a nested form +qt) within footnotes for this use case ?