TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2006-02 > 1139044264


From: Michael N Maggs <>
Subject: Wish list - dangling footnote reference after CR
Date: Sat, 04 Feb 2006 09:11:04 +0000
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20060203164321.04125718@localhost>
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20060203164321.04125718@localhost>


Agreed that that's what you have to do, but should it be? I can't see
any circumstances where one would want a footnote reference to follow
immediately after a carriage return, (nor after a space, come to that).
Putting the [:CR:]code at the beginning of the next tag works until
you add some more data. You then find that an event such as a census
return has pushed itself in between the two tags, and the [:CR:] code
has to be moved elsewhere to get the report to work properly again.

At the moment I side-step the issue by having a special CR tag which
does nothing except put two CRs into the output. I can then use the
sort date to move the CRs to the right place. When more data is added,
I then often find I have to change the sort date of the CR tag.

My wish would be that if an event ends with one or more [:CR:] codes
that the footnote reference should print before and not after the
resultant CRs in the report.

Michael



Paul E. Lawrence wrote:

>
> You should put the carriage return(s) at the beginning of the next tag
> not at the end of a tag for the reason you have stated...
>


I have a question along these lines. When I add a carriage return(s) at the
end of a sentence to create a carriage return in a report, instead of
printing the footnote reference number and the period before the carriage
return it places both after the carriage return where it sits all by its
lonesome looking stupid in my report. Is there any way to change this or am
I doing it wrong somehow? This is what it looks like:

blah blah end of sentence and paragraph

1.

blah blah next paragraph...


Thanks!

--

This thread: