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
The last footnote in the manual is in §5.7 on p33, but there should be more. I noticed while mucking about with the new Esperanto support (#1444) and why in the world the Ruby package docs are killing the manual build (#1451) that the footnote I added was showing a marker but no footnote. Another example in the current manual sources in master might be in §11.1 on p98 where I see another marker but no footnote.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
At least one reproducible MWE of a very likely related issue:
\begin[papersize=a6, class=book]{document}
\script[src=packages/autodoc]
\define[command=code]{\process}
\package-documentation[src=packages/insertions]
HERE A FOOTNOTE\footnote{I shall be here}
\end{document}
SILE 0.12.5 has the footnote.
SILE 0.13.0 (from docker image) only shows the footnote call.
Looking here, it seems that this is introduced by the SILE.require vs require changes introduced in 0.13.
If actually change that line from
local pkg = require(package)
to
local pkg = SILE.require(package)
Then the footnote is back....
However the code, a few lines below that one, now manually registerCommands. It seems wrong to me anyway (commands could expect settings and initialization so as to work properly...).
EDIT: Now why loading the insertions with a "require" breaks them, I'have no idea !
However the code, a few lines below that one, now manually registerCommands. It seems wrong to me anyway (commands could expect settings and initialization so as to work properly...).
Commands may require their respective packages to be initialized when they are called, but they should not require anything to register. By the time they are used the package will be initialized.
The last footnote in the manual is in §5.7 on p33, but there should be more. I noticed while mucking about with the new Esperanto support (#1444) and why in the world the Ruby package docs are killing the manual build (#1451) that the footnote I added was showing a marker but no footnote. Another example in the current manual sources in master might be in §11.1 on p98 where I see another marker but no footnote.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: