0 votes
410 views

I have a project where the asterisk is used as the main footnote caller. But in some specific cases (when it’s the second footnote in the same verse) there should be two asterisks. So the plain SFM looks the following:

\p \v 1 Civîna Entakyayêda çend p'êxember û dersdar hebûn, Barnabas, Şimh'ûnê ku jêr'a Nîgêr\f + \fr 13:1 \ft «Nîgêr» jî çawa «merivê ç'ermê r'eş» tê fe'mkirinê.\f* digotin, Lûkyoyê ji Kûrênê, Menayînê ku t'evî Hêrodesê%f serwêr\f ** \fr 13:1 \ft Eva Hêrodesa, awa gotî Hêrodes-Antîpas, serwêrê Celîlê bû (\xt Lûqa 3:1\xt*).\f* mezin bibû û Şawûl.

This is how it looks in Paratext Preview mode and how I want it to look in PDF:

The first footnote looks OK, but the second one is incorrect:

  • one asterisk instead of two in the text
  • in the footnotes section the second asterisk is different and separated with a space.

On the View+Edit > Final SFM tab I see that the second footnote marker has been changed:

\f * \asterisk\space

I know that this file can’t be edited in PTXprint, but the original Paratext file is formatted correctly! I tried t use “Advanced > Apply Changes.txt (and PrintDraftChanges.txt) > Edit” function, added a string to substitute \f * \asterisk\space with \f **

"\\f .\\asterisk\\space" > "\\f  \\*\\*"

But the result is the same. Is there a way to render this custom caller correctly, like in Paratext?

PTXprint by (112 points) | 410 views

5 Answers

+1 vote

I just tested, and it looks like any two-character sequence will get broken up by this. I tried “hi”, and got the “h” as a superscript and the “i” as part of the footnote. And actually “12” failed also, though when using “+” you can certainly get double-digit numbers.

I also looked at the USFM documentation, and I don’t see anything stating that a footnote caller can’t be multiple characters, so I suspect this might be a bug. I tried to figure out a hack to get around it, but was unsuccessful.

If you don’t get a solution soon, you could consider using \u2051, ⁑, two asterisks aligned vertically.

by (1.9k points)
+1 vote

I’ve just taken the slightly scary (for me) step of messing with a regular expression in the python code… It seems to do what we want and not crash anything. Assuming the python experts don’t revert it, then it’ll be fixed in 2.3.13.

by (1.1k points)
0 votes

Updated PTXprint to 2.3.16, now the footnotes with “**” simply disappeared completely: no callers in the text, no footnotes. :sweat:

by (112 points)
0 votes

Hmm. It seems that the python code is trying to be too helpful, and doesn’t like letting *s through unaltered. Hopefully Martin will be able to fix it soon.
For me it’s turning \f ** \fr ... into \f * \asterisk\space \fr ...
I don’t know how familiar you are with the “Advanced” tab, but on there you can enable the changes file, and in that you could put a line like this:

"\\f \*\*" > "\\f @@"

That ought to change \f ** into \f @@ (in the temporary copy of your SFM file which PTXprint uses to print from, NOT your original paratext file - that stays unchanged).
I realise that \f @@ isn’t what you want, but based on my quick test, it should at least print! You can then comment out that line (put # at the start of the line) to see if things are working later on.

by (1.1k points)

This has been fixed now in version 2.3.17, and you should be able to use multi-character footnote callers, even if there are 2 ** in a row.

0 votes

I’ve tested PTXprint 2.3.18, it works perfectly, the issue is fixed! Thank you so much!

by (112 points)

Related questions

+1 vote
1 answer 37 views
My problem: Sometimes in the maintext, the footnote caller auto-created in an alphabet order prints in the end of ... In PTXPrints, how to print the new footnote caller formatting?
Y Mdu Niê 124 asked Jan 14
0 votes
2 answers 504 views
When I change the footnote callers to automatically-created callers, I get errors in the basic checks. I'm sure there is ... m missing somewhere, but I can't seem to find where!
anon928451 127 asked Feb 13, 2023
+1 vote
8 answers 1.0k views
I have a team who is getting lots of errors in the marker check: Footnote caller is not the expected value (*) ... majority are the errors with only a minority of correct ones.
anon703820 215 asked Dec 7, 2017
0 votes
1 answer 15 views
Is there a way to adjust the spacing before and after footnote callers in the text? It looks like there is a space before the ... 7:25. I'd also like to add space after the caller.
mlucas53 148 asked Jul 28, 2025
0 votes
2 answers 40 views
Hi all, I'm working with a project that previously marked all footnote callers manually. Now, we have started ... , so I could just be missing something. Thanks, Aaron
PecanMango 112 asked Nov 6, 2024
Welcome to Support Bible, where you can ask questions and receive answers from other members of the community.
Dear friends, since God so loved us, we also ought to love one another.
1 John 4:11
3,037 questions
5,994 answers
5,661 comments
2,022 users