Compiling Footnotes Flush Left and without a Period after the Footnote Number

I want my footnotes to not have a period after the footnote number, and the footnote numbers to appear flush left at the margin. I have read through the Scrivener 3.2.2 manual (esp. page 660). However, I can´t find the settings to modify the footnotes as desired. Any thoughts. I am absolutely stumped as the compile options and outputs in all relevant formats—ODT, PDF, DOCX—insert a period after the footnote number and indent the footnotes to the same degree as paragraphs in the main text. Any thoughts. I am totally out of ideas as the Compile menu does not have any of the options described in the Manual as far as I can find.

I guess in your setup the Indent footnotes AND Use period and space style checkboxes are ticked.
Get to these setting by double-clicking a Format, a Section Layout or the Pencil icon on the top right corner of a Section Layout in the Compile Overview window.

TY! However, when I tick the box to use period and space style instead of superscript in markers, the footnote numbers still appear as superscript (but with a period) when exporting to ODT. I have to use ODT to run Zotero RTF/ODT scan on my references. When I export to PDF, it properly uses the normal font, i.e., not superscript. Any thoughts?

I’m getting Superscript numbers exclusively in .docx or .odt, with a period when the checkbox is checked and without a period when the checkbox is not checked. I don’t know why it’s not a normal number and can’t seem to change the superscript to normal anywhere in Scrivener.

You’ll just have to replace Footnotes superscript numbers into normal numbers in OpenOffice, I suppose.

Yes, I have spent some time attempting to do just that in Libre Office, unsuccessfully. If you happen to know how to do that, let me know, and thank you!

There is still an open ticket on various aspects of this setting. From what I can tell, RTF output is largely working as expected at this point, and since that can be opened fine in LibreOffice, that’s probably the best way to go.

Yes, Scrivener appears to have a bug since the option appears to offer normal (not superscript) numbering in the footnote reference followed by a period, as the manual says at p. 660, but that is NOT what the software outputs. As stated above, and by another user who tested also in another forum, who reported “it looks like it’s either supposed to be normal numbers with a period (which isn’t working right, and may be a bug that it’s producing superscript), or superscript without a period.”

Would it be possible to have a tech look into this to fix it?

Thank you!

Yes, to reiterate, there is an open ticket on this, and the various issues with how it is not working properly are all documented.

You should not be getting a superscript with RTF though, which is why I suggested trying that.

Dear AmberV,
Let me know if this is a correct understanding — I am assuming that I will hear back and hopefully get the “all clear” to go ahead (possibly update Scrivener) and compile directly from Scrivener to .odt format, and the footnote references will appear properly, that is, normal (not superscript) and with a period, as described in the manual. As for the .rtf export option, that worked on a short document, I then have to transfer that compiled .rtf file to .odt, to run the Zotero scan. Okay. I fear that on long documents, with hundreds of footnotes, additional transfers might corrupt the file, so I look forward to hearing back on the possible fix. Let me know, and thank you.

So Zotero cannot scan an RTF file directly, I take it? RTF is Scrivener’s native format, so in most cases it will be the best choice anyway, since LibreOffice is going to do a better job of creating an ODT file from it. Likewise you’ll probably get the best DOCX by compiling as RTF and converting in Word. I suppose this may be a case in point, since it seems the built-in conversion isn’t handling this formatting correctly—but there may be some other complication going on. So consider that when you mention a fear of corruption (I’ve never heard of such a thing myself) when converting between word processing formats. Unless you are using RTF, you are always converting, it’s just a matter of which tool you are using, our embedded converter or another.

As for updates, the best you can do is keep an eye on the change logs. While we may at times update a forum thread when something is fixed, it’s really not feasible for us to go through hundreds of threads after a release, so I wouldn’t depend on it for news.

Oh I just noticed something, as some wires may have been crossed since I saw a Windows screenshot up-thread, but this is in the Mac section. Much of what I just said remains the same though, since we use the same ODT conversion engine on both platforms.

And given that, I wonder if it is even something we can fix. Since the original source file is fine in RTF, but this is how the ODT converter handles it, that isn’t our code making the conversion.

In that case, I think perhaps it ought to be specified in Scrivener’ User guide that RTF (and PDF) are the only formats currently that compile footnote references found at the bottom of the page in normal script. By the way, Zotero keeps track for numbering and citation styles (Supra, Id., infra) of footnotes only if the document is in the ODT format, not RTF. That is why I needed to scan as ODT. As for corruption issues, I have found that Zotero likes ODT best. When making a ton of changes and transferring a document back and forth between Scrivener and Zotero, I had been doing so in ODT. But I am hearing you say that Scrivener will handle imports of documents in RTF better than ODT. So, I will convert documents from ODT to RTF in Libre Office, then import into Scrivener, if that is the case, yes?

Thanks for the feedback. I try not to document bugs, since that leads to a lot of back and forth revision tracking for a version of the PDF that most people never see anyway (the one online that I keep up to date between software versions). I.e. if we remove the checkbox from DOCX/ODT/DOC in the next update because the converter cannot handle it, then it will be removed from the manual as well. But until that point in time, I can’t predict what will happen.

But I am hearing you say that Scrivener will handle imports of documents in RTF better than ODT. So, I will convert documents from ODT to RTF in Libre Office, then import into Scrivener, if that is the case, yes?

For import I would say it is less important, at least for this particular matter since footnotes are not typeset in Scrivener itself. But it’s always good to try different options if you don’t get a good result with the first format you try. Word processing formats can be a bit of a mess where it comes to what supports which features.

But yeah overall the general rule of thumb is that if you use RTF for import/export then Scrivener isn’t doing much by way of conversion, outside of its additional features like stylesheets and such, that the underlying RTF engine doesn’t support. So if you’re working with a word processor that has an excellent RTF conversion itself, then it’s usually the best choice. I understand in this case there are additional circumstances that complicate matters—having a tool that only works well with ODT.