-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 402
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Footnotes versus pandoc #32
Comments
No, no particular reason for the difference. I'm not opposed to changes to improve this, but in all honesty I've been considering moving over to CommonMark (and the cmark package). |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
pandoc provides two sorts of footnotes. The syntax uses
[^refid]
instead of{^refid}
for the reference, and[^refid]: text
instead of{refid} text
for the footnote itself. Any reason for the disparity?Then there's also the inline reference
^[some note]
, and the fact that pandoc collects all scattered footnotes into a special<div>
at the bottom of the document.And the markup is different as well, but that doesn't really bother me too much.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: