On 9/17/07, George Herbert george.herbert@gmail.com wrote:
On 9/17/07, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason avarab@gmail.com wrote:
- there should be another, similar, tag for "real" footnotes. <note>
would be great. They would operate identically to (1).
Do you just want the ability to make two citation-like lists per article whereas you can make one now? If that's the case wouldn't a system where you can make and flush an arbitrary number of lists be better?
How many are we likely to want? Enough that general-purposing the mechanism (rather than a second instance) makes sense?
What I've gathered from the people that want footnotes is that they want another list per-article they can flush with a different tag, i.e.:
""" Some statement<ref name="ref name">This is a reference</ref> and something to note<note name="note name">This is a note</note>.
== References == <references/>
== Notes == <notes/> """
If that's the case I think *implementation wise* it would be a neat idea to support reference groups, so the above could be written as:
""" Some statement<ref group="references" name="ref name">This is a reference</ref> and something to note<ref group="notes" name="note name">This is a note</ref>.
== References == <references group="references"/>
== Notes == <references group="notes"/> """
And since that's a bit more verbose the <note> and <notes> tags could be provided anyway, they'd just be exactly equivalent to providing a group=notes (or some other name) to the ref/references pair.
The reason I mention that is that although I'm wont to design crappy stuff I at least like to make it crappy in a general way so people can hammer things I hadn't thought of out of it.
Would that cover the notes use case in your (and other list members) opinion?
- named REFs can have another parameter, "page=". These would be
collected into the references at the bottom, with each lettered reference appearing.
A variation of this has already been suggested and I believe there's an open bug for it. "category" or "section" is more agnostic to the format being cited than "page" although I guess all could be provided.
How about 'specific="page 45-47"'; that way you can put in whatever internal location specification makes contextual sense given the media being referred to...
Something like that, I really don't feel like taking a stance on specific interfaces given my obviously flawed track record in designing something people are happy with. But element names should in my opinion:
1. Be easy to type and remember for an international audience (which extensions inherently fail at since you can't localize them, but I digress) 2. Be general enough to apply to pages/chapters/whatever 3. Something else I'm forgetting :)