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
I’d like to take another look at the footnote grammar after version 3 (GH-96, GH-78). It will probably be removed from the core and into an external plug-in.
wooorm
changed the title
footnoteDefinition is not created if it's only one word
Ambiguous definitions: footnotes without spacing
Dec 7, 2015
Previously, in the below example, the second definition was parsed as
a normal definition instead of a footnote definition:
```md
foo[^abc] bar. foo[^xyz] bar
[^abc]: Baz baz
[^xyz]: Baz
```
Now, both are seen as footnote definitions.
ClosesGH-106.
using
mdast.parse()
:The "Baz" portion actually is created as a regular
definition
and the corresponding reference atfoo[^abc]
is alinkReference
.However, if I add a second word to the definition, that fixes it and
footerReference
&footerDefinition
are created as expected. e.g.So it seems like there might be a flaw in the parsing for footnotes that requires a sentence structure.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: