[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       markdown-discuss
Subject:    Re: footnote syntax
From:       Richard Taytor <dick () gutz ! com>
Date:       2008-02-08 19:18:24
Message-ID: 20080208111824473219.80a207e6 () gutz ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

> why not [use the caret]?

As mentioned, the caret is clearly associated with superscript; however, footnotes \
are the semantic subject here, not superscript. Footnotes are one way of presenting \
notes, which can also be presented as endnotes and sidenotes (which need no markers).

In any case, I think footnote markers should not be restricted superscript. There are \
other patterns in use, which do not use superscript, such as "[Harvard referencing \
][]". I find it useful to employ such full-height [reference links][*rlink], \
sometimes for notes as well as citations.

I don't see an overloading problem with using asterisk for footnotes.

[*rlink]: For monochrome text display (most printed material), markers (superscript \
or otherwise) are certainly useful, if not necessary; however, in the case of \
coloured hyperlinks, the markers (though they remain useful for long strings) are \
superfluous for cases in which the text in question may be directly linked instead. I \
don't mean to suggest that this form should replace existing footnote form, merely \
that the form and utility of notes can be easily augmented.

[Harvard referencing }: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvard_referencing


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]