Color lost on split footnote about latex2e HOT 19 OPEN

from latex2e.

Probably for the L3 colour experiments I should have multiple stacks built-in :)

from latex2e.

@FrankMittelbach Do we need 'category' in the label? Wouldn't just 'graphics' cover it? BTW, nice use of the 'machine' user (@latexteam) ;)

from latex2e.

from latex2e.

from latex2e.

Well, offering the advice to use bigfoot is better than saying tough (or not saying anything :-).
For 2e that might be all we ever want to do but going forward I think @josephwright is right that some colorstack model might be in dire need

from latex2e.

from latex2e.

I don't follow the comment about pdfTeX: it has a colour stack in the same way dvips does.

from latex2e.

Or at least, that's my understanding of the fact it has separate stacks ...

from latex2e.

Of course, pdfTeX/LuaTeX in PDF mode is only a subset of what needs to work, so the bigfoot approach is probably the only generally-viable one (at least until/unless stacks work in dvips and (x)dvipdfmx).

from latex2e.

@josephwright Yes, I think so. I immediately thought about \marks associated with any color whatsit to be able to track the colour stack and complete it as necessary. Certainly the same sort of "bug" could be shown with the multicols package, although i've not written an example yet ;-(

Anyway, i HATE footnotes that split accross pages ! Some books print footnotes with a footnote rule in the middle of the page. Depending on what sort of book it is, the result is not necessarily ugly...)

from latex2e.

Probably fixable for pdfTeX, maybe not for dvips, etc.

from latex2e.

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

from latex2e.

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity.

from latex2e.

It's funny to see all these spurious references. I scratched my head for a moment but the reason is simple: people have replied showing code with arguments from mail so the code got interprreted and @ macros became users (what what they thought getting referenced if they happened to exist :-) ) and the #1 ended up here. Dosn't seem possible to delete thos spurious ones.

Anyway, I think we are finally able to resolve this issue in the fall release of LaTeX (if we get configuration points then), so I tentatively penciled that in now,

from latex2e.

@FrankMittelbach Fix isn't too bad, it's a question partly of if we are happy saying 'works in pdfTeX, LuaTeX, recent-XeTeX/dvipdfmx routes, but not dvips' (I guess 'doesn't even feature' for dvisvgm)

from latex2e.

But with the coming fall release we will (or should be) able to detect a split footnote stream and thus can handle tagging and color for it regardless of the back end. And given that there will be no fix before that release (or only in a summer "dev") I see not much point in a partial fix, or am I missing something?

from latex2e.

@FrankMittelbach Ah, right, I see how you are imagining a fix. I was thinking of engine colour stacks not of breaking this down at the LaTeX level.

from latex2e.

@josephwright well, we need the machinery for paragraphs anyway, so yes, color could could be handled differently, but what would we really gain by that? I guess not much, but who knows, it is certainly a possible option we have available.

from latex2e.