I'm happy to let you know that it.source community
started a project
to build one, or more, transcriptions "with scans" of Alighieri's
Divina Commedia; presently it.source has only a "naked" version.
An authoritative comments is that by
Lana:
http://it.wikisource.org/wiki/Indice:Commedia_-_Inferno_(Lana).djvu
<http://it.wikisource.org/wiki/Pagina:Commedia_-_Inferno_%28Lana%29.djvu/117>.
But, please, take a look to its page
structure:
http://it.wikisource.org/wiki/Pagina:Commedia_-_Inferno_(Lana).djvu/117
<http://it.wikisource.org/wiki/Pagina:Commedia_-_Inferno_%28Lana%29.djvu/117>
As you see, pages mix two different, indipendent texts, Alighieri's
text ad Lana's comment, each one with its own, separate annotations.
The author's aim was, obvioulsy, to allow an immediate comparison of
the comment and original text. How can be solved the trouble of
indipendent annotations, of reasonably simple use of pages tag, and of
other issues, saving the author's aim too? Are there running examples
of proofread works with a similar page structure, just to learn needed
tricks from them ?
Alex
If you use <pages/> you will not be able to transclude
the first text only, or the second text only. This could
be an interesting feature to add, but it is not there yet.
For the moment it needs to be done manually.
besides that, you can do various things with {{Option}}
For the different types of footnotes see