On 8/25/05, Michael Smith <> wrote:
> Zbyszek Cybulski <> writes:
>
> > On 8/25/05, Michael Smith <> wrote:
>
> > But the changed footnote labeling relates only to appendices. In
> > chapters, sections and probably other components it works fine.
>
> hmm, perhaps it's related, then. Have you tried setting the value
> of appendix.autolabel to 1? If so, what happens to the footnote
> labels?
>
> It should actually have no effect on the footnote labels. If it
> does, then it means there's something wrong deeper in the new
> autolabeling code that was added for the 1.69.0 release. (In
> contrast to the cause of the problem you originally reported, in
> the autolabeling of the appendix itself, which was just an
> oversight in default value of the appendix.autolabel parameter.)
>
> --Mike
>
> --
> Michael Smith
> http://sideshowbarker.net/
>
>
>
It seems to be something wrong with the footnote labeling code. I have
upgraded to 1.69.1, updated catalog.xml, run the transformation and
got a bit different results, that is, broken footnote labeling in
appendices. The appendix labels are ok now, i.e., they are letters.
FYI, the footnotes are placed withing table cells. I think it can be helpful.
I worked around this by setting the labeling format to numerical:
table.footnote.number.format set to 1
Do you want me to file a bug report?
-Z
