Simply the best footnotes plugin available.

Hi @msilvertant

we have fixed the major issues on this plugin now and are releasing new fixes for minor issues soon. Can you give us another try for your website?

Best wishes
Mark

Hello Mark,

Some of the issues we were having, my web developer managed to fix by turning the plugin off on certain pages, I think. To that end, it would be nice to have the choice of which pages the plugin is active on, because in my case it only needs to be active on blog posts.

But the issue with the grouped links persists. For each grouped link, only the first two footnotes actually link to the references at the bottom; all other links still don’t bring you to the bottom.

I will gladly give 5 stars once this issue has been fixed.

Also, I just noticed the numbers in the list of references are now links, and the arrows have been removed. Could you include an option to toggle that on or off? Because I thought the way it was, was perfect. I’m not too keen on what it looks and functions like now. Making the numbers into links doesn’t look right, and intuitively I wouldn’t have guessed that clicking on them brings me up to the article; whereas the arrows made it immediately clear that this is what it would do.

I feel you have decreased usability with the recent update.

Thanks for bringing back the arrows! It makes sense to have the numbers and arrows linked together, too.

The only problem left is the dead links when more than 3 instances of the same reference are grouped together.

Hi @msilvertant,

I’m very concerned with the issues you are reporting. I’ve tried to get each grouped number individually to be an uplink, but there was a bug with increments, and we resigned to release an urgent, upcoming fix restoring the arrow setting.

I’m sorry that the arrows were so good and I removed them, but as you are pointing out, the redundancy was mainly in having the symbols in an extra column while the numbers were doing nothing (beside showing up). Using the numbers as backlinks was what resulted from a blog of mine first overlaying a semi-transparent ▲ on the numbers, and removing the ▲ symbols outright when a correspondent suggested doing so.

Whatever option is retained, one new style rule is that when a post is printed to a file and/or on paper to bring out some copies, the layout is without added arrows, just as we’re used to seeing footnotes.

For combined footnotes there will hopefully be a solution while personally I agree too that combining notes make for a bad UX. Why so?

1. Combined notes are too many buttons grouped together, assuming that each backlink works as intended. The footnotes way the reader can remember the number or letter and click on the right one when using a mouse. Not so on mobile, where these clusters are grouping numbers to close to each other (I’ve tried it out today but on a laptop). Yet remember: we should provide mobile-first design.
2. Many combined notes in a post are sort of monotone. Some added value to each note would be great, such as a page number, a figure reference, or quite a bit of quotation. That’s how I try to make each footnote unique. Beside that, I’ve disabled grouping like you did. One flaw I’d fix is to have the setting in the first place and enabled by default. I’d rather disable it by default (that’s what it is in the upcoming v2.0.4). The checkbox could also be at the end of the Reference container settings or in Other settings.

But we need to support the feature working, so I’m sorry we’re not yet there.

As @markcheret pointed out, there were many issues and fortunately some of them are now fixed, sadly not all, while I think, too, that we need this plugin.

• This reply was modified 4 years, 4 months ago by pewgeuges.

I see the grouped footnotes bug is fixed now, so I’m comfortable using that feature again. I’m so happy with this plugin! I changed the rating accordingly.

★★★★★

@msilvertant

We thank you for your appreciation and rating!

The three-column reference container has become available as an option since this bugfix release 2.1.1.

Sorry for not thinking at making the two-column layout optional in the first place.

Best regards,

@pewgeuges for the Footnotes plugin team