#1

Steps to reproduce

  1. Create a note with the following source:
    # YAFB
    ## yet another footnote bug
    Footnote bug[^1]
    Another paragraph pointing to the same footnote[^1]

    Last paragraph pointing to a different footnote[^2]

    [^1]: Footnote 1
    [^2]: Footnote 2
  1. Switch to preview.
  2. Try clicking the three footnote links and the three “return” links in the footer.

Expected result

  1. First two footnote references should have superscript [1] in them.
  2. First and second footnote references should point to footnote 1, third should point to footnote 2.
  3. The “return” arrows at the footer should point to the respective places in the document where the footnote reference appears.

Actual result

  1. The second footnote reference renders as superscript [1:1].
  2. Works fine.
  3. The second return arrow in the footer doesn’t lead anywhere.

Environment

  • Operating system: Windows 10
  • Obsidian version: 0.8.1

Additional information

2 Likes
#2

I noticed the same thing (0.8.0 on mac) and have been meaning to add a bug report. Thanks

#3

Let me know if you still have this issue with 0.8.5

#4

Issue is there, unfortunately, and it got worse: none of the links in the body are working, none of the links in the footer are working. Instead, they’are rendering as external links (an arrow pointing outside of a square) and when I click them, I’m offered a standard Windows dialog box to choose an application to open app link. :man_shrugging:

#5

This is fixed in 0.8.6. Except [1-n] which will remain as is.

1 Like
#6

Why doesn’t show just [1] again and not [1-n]?

#7

I’m having the same issue. The first instance of a footnote appears as superscript [1] but subsequent instances are superscript [1-n] (n=1,2,3 etc. increasing with each instance).
Is this the expected result?
I would much prefer all instances to show up as [1] no matter how many times I refer to the same footnote.
Is there any way to fix this?

1 Like
#8

yes, it is.

Multiple instances of a footnote get rendered unexpectedly
#9

To follow up on this, why is it designed this way? Is it a limitation of Obsidian’s cross-referencing or something like that? I’ve never seen footnotes handled like this before.

The reason it’s a problem for me is that I’d like to use footnotes as academic style citations. Say I have four items in my bibliography, and I cite item 1 four times. It will show up as [1-4], which in the standard notation means citations 1 through 4. So when I share it through Obsidian Publish, it’s likely to be misinterpreted.

Wish for the ability to toggle off the default naming behavior of footnotes
#10

It’s used to create different point for the different return links at the bottom.
Using footnotes as references is bit of hack anyway, feel free to open a feature request to have footnotes links drop the [1-n] format.

#11