Feetneet

[jack]

[1] Preferably both at once.

I often use footnotes both for their intended purpose of conveying incidental or clarifying informtation, and for humour value[1], and have thought somewhat about the best way of presenting this.

For a book, at the bottom of the page is reasonable, you can easily see it if you want to, and not if you don't. I'm pleased to see that my wordprocessor, I'm sure since the last time I looked, has acquired the ability to do this automatically. The problem of footnotes too long for a page isn't really solved, though -- though they're only really a wonderful novelty, you should ideally have a different convention for that much supplementary information.

Many websites duplicate this, which mostly works, though it often involves scanning up and down. Some people htmlise the process, and make the footnote mark a link to the text at the bottom, and some cunning fellows have that have a link back to the right place in the main text.

[2] This text should appear in a box at the right side of the post, level with the main text paragraph.

[3] Or linked.

But an innovation that in retropsect seems obvious is sidenotes[2]. In book or website, having a box at the side of the page level with the note makes it easiest to track to, and the numbering nearly superfluous, if the word is underlined[3] and repeated in the box. But I more often have notes referring to paragraphs, when underlining the last word or the whole thing both seem odd.

I neglect dynamic solutions, eg. mouse hovering making text appear in a box, or autonumbering because (a) less compatible (often using javascript) (b) useful for definitions, but less so when people want to read all your footnotes (c) I don't like it.

Here I've had a go at making callout boxes, doing it simply with div style tags, and not bothering will colours. Please comment if it seems to appear correctly or incorrectly in your browser. If it doesn't implement styles, the footnote will appear at the start of the paragraph.

Comments

[cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com]

Thank you.

Actually [3] worked as I expected, and I formatted it so people would see that effect and judge, which was apparently fortunate.

My reasoning was the natural thing to do is the eyes jump to the side and then flick down boxes until they find the [3]. And often you will have several footnotes in a para, you have to do something.

[pseudomonas.livejournal.com]

Ouch. lynx 2.8.4 (under OSF/1) displays the footnotes above the paragraph. I quite often read LJ using lynx, especially when replying to comment notification emails (since it's just one keystroke from within pine). 's very confusing.

[cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com]

Don't worry, I knew that was a problem (though not how many people it would apply to); I wouldn't adopt this technique until there's a system which isn't inconvenient to them. I presumed that changing it so it worked with postnotes would be an easy but googling intensive css excersize, so postponed it till later.

[simont]

I'm curious about that misspelling "excersize". It seems very common, and I have a theory about why which I'd like to test. Can you think about why you spell "exercise" that way, and then un-rot13 the following and see if it agrees? Vg nyjnlf frrzf gb zr gung gur zvffcryyvat pbzrf sebz svefg chggvat "fvmr" ba gur raq, naq gura erzrzorevat gung lbh xabj gurer'f n p va gurer fbzrjurer naq gurer'f bayl bar cynpr yrsg gb chg vg.

[cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com]

Embarassingly I didn't even see the 'c' even when I reread it. Sorry :) But I agree.