Re: [office] Proposal: Footnote reference Class

[Michael Brauer <michael.brauer@sun.com>]

Hi David,

David Faure wrote:
> On Thursday 23 September 2004 16:40, Michael Brauer wrote:
> 
>>Dear TC members,
>>
>>some time ago we agreed to merge the footnote element <text:footnote> 
>>and endnote element <text:endnote> into a single <text:note> element, 
>>where a new "text:note-class" attribute specifies whether the note 
>>actually is a footnote or an endnote.
>>
>>At the same time, we merged the elements for text fields that contain a 
>>reference to a foot- or endnote (<text:footnote-ref> and 
>><text:endnote-ref>) into a single <text:note-ref> that does not have 
>>"text:note-class" attribute. I in fact don't know what our reasons for 
>>not having these attribute for note references were, but I would like to 
>>propose to add it to the <text:note-ref> element for two reasons:
>>
>>1. The <text:note-ref> element references foot- and endnotes by names. 
>>In the schema, these names are not ID's, but only strings. That means 
>>that foot and endnotes may have the same name, and that a 
>><text:note-ref> that does not specify what kind of note it references 
>>may become ambiguous.
>>2. Note references may reference notes that are below the reference in 
>>the text. In this case, the type of the note might not be known when the 
>>note reference is read. This may cause problems for applications that 
>>differ between footnotes and endnotes either in its document model or in 
>>the view they craete fo a document. This issue might become more severe 
>>than we add new note types. The possibility to do so actually was one 
>>reason why we merged foot- and endnotes.
> 
> 
> So the proposal is to add a text:note-class attribute to <text:note-ref>, where
> this attribute can be either "footnote" or "endnote"?
> Or do I misunderstand the proposal?
> 

That's correct. Sorry for the confusing description.

Michael