-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 25
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Linking of figures with refs is inconsistent #52
Comments
I noticed a typo:
should prob read
then it would be consistent with the line that worked
Hope this helps? |
Does @jrennstich's advice solve the problem, @autotel? I'm a bit unfamiliar with the use of backslashes in that manner. |
Hi! No, the problem has no relation with the direction of slashes. The problem remains with consistent forward slashes. I think it might have more relation with the code that matches the ref string. MD text:
--edit 2--
|
I tried using the crossref filter, and it produces the same problems; this means that the problem is on how I wrote the references. I cannot find the problem, though. |
I finally found the problem: it had to do not with the referencing itself, but with the breaking lines relation among the images. I will explain since this may help others:
I removed the line containing the fig b01, because I thought it was not related to the problem and would make reading easier. I ran into this caveat:
My figure is not strictly within the text, but it had a single break instead of a double break, which the working figure does have. Probably the MD parser considered the single break as no break at all. This is sad, because the nice thing about writing in MD is not having to deal with counter-intuitive problems that other formats may have. In short, the way to solve the not-found figure references is to separate all the target figures with at least to line breaks. |
Yes, pandoc requires figures to be in their own paragraph. I'm glad that you were able to sort it out. Cheers, |
I started using fignos a couple of days ago. Very useful, the filter is greatly appreciated.
I noted an inconsistent behavior leading to "reference fig:b03 not found" warnings. Some cases where I observed this: (note that my text is longer which may be causing the behavior?)
(from md text)
in this case it finds fig b04 but not b03.
if I remove the space between figs. and the reference, turning it into
(figs@fig:b03 & @fig:b04).
then it finds both. It seems either as the preceding character affects the readout of the reference, or as if the preceding character makes the label to be parsed by citeproc instead of fignos, since the error message looks like:
pandoc-citeproc: reference fig:b01 not found
perhaps there is a problem with the pattern which matches and consume the tags. I personally thing that the recognition of a fig. should not be affected by the preceding token.
this is the pandoc command:
pandoc ./text.md -s -o ./text.html --filter pandoc-fignos --filter pandoc-citeproc --bibliography="./sources.yaml"
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: