Couple of Possible Bugettes / Couple of Suggestions


I’ve been using the tool for a while now and have noticed the following issues.

I’m not sure if some of them are minor bugs or if I’ve misunderstood how the product is supposed to work, so feel free to ignore them…

Possible Bugettes.

  1. Underlining the first couple of words of an item in a numbered list also causes the number itself to become underlined (you may not want this). Also, when you produce compiled output of this (in HTML, at least) the whole of the entry is underlined rather than just the specific words underlined in the editor. This latter problem does not happen when Bolding words, so seems to be an issue with underlining only.

  2. Bulleted lists appear to be incompatible with latest version of Open Office. They do not appear in the odt document (although importing the file into Word does cause the raw text to appear, but not as a numbered list).

  3. When producing hierarchically-numbered documents, taking the <$hn> tag out of the Section Layout Prefix also causes it to become disabled in the body of the text. You may want it to be in order to customise your headings.

  4. When producing output in MMD, sometimes the numbering of the <$hn> tag reverts to “1” when used in the body of the text for no apparent reason.

  5. Sometimes the name of the compile settings you are using reverts to “Custom” even though you haven’t made any changes to them since last saving it with a specific name.

  6. If you tag a footnote to a word that is italicised, such as the name of a book, compiling to MMD produces a label (e.g. “[3]”) that is italicised, too. You usually will not want this.


  1. A “Quick Compile” hotkey. This would go straight through the compile process assuming all current settings. It would also automatically overwrite any existing output file that has the same name. This would be useful when you are making a series of frequent minor changes to see how they look in the output.

  2. More control over how footnote numbering appears. Sometimes you don’t want it superscripted but instead as square brackets e.g. “[3]” (even in non-MMD formats).

  3. More ability to move footnotes around. Sometimes you realise you highlighted the wrong word or otherwise want to move a note to another place. Currently (AFAICS) you have to delete the note and then re-enter it at the new location. This is too inconvenient. Also the ability to extend the highlighting to another character or two in order to get the required spacing would be useful. You can get around this at the moment if you experiment a bit, but it should be easier.

  4. Ability to have more than one footnote linked to the same highlighted word is often required in academic writing.

  5. Ability to give end-note section its own heading would be useful.

  6. A compile option half-way between HTML and MMD. No

    and tags so you can more easily drop the output into your blog and have it pick up the existing formating, but with italics, tables, lists and so on. Footnotes linked to text and with normal text type (e.g. “[3]” non superscripted).

All the best,