funny Ibid situation

[hrashid]

I'm not sure if this is a Bookends or a Mellel issue, but I'l start here.

Using Bookends and Mellel.

I have three footnotes, that prior to scan look like this:

1. Ref X@80
2. Some text to explain something. See Ref Y@200
3. Ref X@80

After scan, I get:
1. Ref X, 80. [no problem]
2. Some text to explain something. See Ibid., 200. [problem]
3. Ibid, 80. [problem b/c of note 2]

In case it makes a difference, note 2 is actually in a different note stream, but it is the first time I am using source Y, so it can't be referring to an earlier reference.

Thanks,
Hussein

[Jon]

Hi,

I don't know how Mellel handles note streams. What I can say is that Mellel hands Bookends a list of citations, and Bookends sends the resolved citations back to Mellel in the same order. If a citation is preceded by the same citation, Bookends assigns Ibid. to it (if checked as an option, of course). Then Mellel places them where they belong. It's possible that with note streams what Bookends is receiving isn't the in the same order in the document that you might expect.

If you simplify the document so that it is just footnote1, footnote2, footnote3, does that work?

Jon
Sonny Software

[hrashid]

Excellent Jon. Using one note stream does clear it up, and the order in which the notes appear makes a difference to how the Ibid. is displayed. Seems like an issue to pass over to the Mellel folks.

Thanks,
Hussein