You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I am creating this issue to flag an (unintended?) feature that was removed from the Libreoffice plugin by this commit: bb21e3c
The feature in question was that the "first-note-reference-number" accurately reflected the number shown in the document itself. Thus the numbering would for example reset for each chapter if footnotes were set to restart at each chapter. For styles that make heavy use of "first-note-reference-number", such as OSCOLA, the loss of this feature was a significant regression.
Apparently, the regression caused by the above-mentioned commit is argued to be acceptable since it "this just brings LibreOffice inline with what Word produces anyway". I don't really see that it is a particularly good argument per se, but there are probably (other) technical arguments for the change that I am not qualified to evaluate. Hopefully this feature can be added back in a more technically correct manner at some later point in time – and I hope this issue can serve as a reminder so that it is not forgotten.
I am creating this issue to flag an (unintended?) feature that was removed from the Libreoffice plugin by this commit: bb21e3c
The feature in question was that the "first-note-reference-number" accurately reflected the number shown in the document itself. Thus the numbering would for example reset for each chapter if footnotes were set to restart at each chapter. For styles that make heavy use of "first-note-reference-number", such as OSCOLA, the loss of this feature was a significant regression.
Apparently, the regression caused by the above-mentioned commit is argued to be acceptable since it "this just brings LibreOffice inline with what Word produces anyway". I don't really see that it is a particularly good argument per se, but there are probably (other) technical arguments for the change that I am not qualified to evaluate. Hopefully this feature can be added back in a more technically correct manner at some later point in time – and I hope this issue can serve as a reminder so that it is not forgotten.
Further details are available in this thread on the Zotero forum: https://forums.zotero.org/discussion/79327/oscola-libreoffice-cross-references-n-suddenly-not-respecting-per-chapter-numbering
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: