On 20/02/2012 at 23:57, wernerjvienna <email@example.com> wrote:
Some journal just demand to use [6-8] or [10-12] respectively in those
cases, what is not useful for a html document of course. So my post above
concerns only the problem of formatting foot- and end-notes and has nothing
to do with reference manager software.
LibreOffice Writer is not capable of doing that. Either if you are using built-
in bibliographic feature, which is lacking some of basic functionality, or if
you are using foot- or endnotes as references.
As student of sociology, I mostly deal with social sciences and I am used to
authors who recklessly confuse footnotes, endnotes and bibliographic
references. But I would expect scientists from natural, physical and formal
sciences to be more strict.
Footnote is a place to add some further information, or comments, from author.
They are not important enough to include in main text, but may be valuable for
some of readers. Or they are simply funny remarks, which some people think
should be avoided in scientific text. This is also place for comments from
translator or publisher (although comments from translator/publisher are
indicated in other way than comments from author). The point is, that reader
may skip reading footnotes without loosing any of author main ideas.
Endnotes are footnotes put after the main part of the book or, less often, at
the end of a chapter, instead of bottom of the page. Some publishers prefer it
this way. If text in footnote is quite long (I have seen footnotes spanning
across two and more pages), perhaps it is better to use endnotes instead.
References contains information about sources and further reading about some
topic. These may be either full bibliographic entry (which has many
disadvantages in texts longer than few pages) or unique identifiers which
expand full bibliographic entry in bibliography, near end of a book.
These things should be distinguished. Yet, due to historical reasons and
habit, they are not. Many people place references in footnotes.
In that Wikipedia article footnotes contains almost only references. Only
footnote 14 contains what footnotes should contain -- commentary. Footnote 13
contains references to works expanding topic, so they may be treated as either
footnote, or reference (depending on writing style).
I am still sure that you are using wrong function (although it may provide
something that *looks like* what you want to achieve). I still can't think of
a single reason why anyone would want to insert multiple footnotes (multiple
commentaries) at one place. Why don't just join them, if they refer to exactly
the same part of text?
Although I still agree with you, that Writer is lacking some functionality in
that area and it could (and perhaps should!) be improved.
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: firstname.lastname@example.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Impressum (Legal Info)
: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our trademark policy