cross-referencing between inspector footnotes

Is there a way to create cross-references between different (foot)notes in the inspector, which will update themselves as soon as the total number of the inspector (foot)notes changes? This question may be a bit unclear, so let me be more specific.

I have a project with many files. All files are intended sections or subsections of a book, and all of them have many inspector footnotes. Many of these footnotes contain references to other footnotes: in the same file or (more often) in other files. These references are all (or should in the final version all become) of the type “see note 62”: simple references to the number of another note.

But of course, during the elaboration process, the total number of inspector footnotes changes continually: some are added, others are deleted or moved to another place, and all these changes have a direct impact upon the cross-references mentioned above. What can I do to make the reference numbers contained in all these cross-references adapt themselves to the changing numbers of inspector notes?

And if (as I fear) there is no real solution for this in Scrivener, is there some work-around that I can consider?

I’m also interested in confirming the answer to this… Subscribed!

I cannot think of any way of doing this that doesn’t involve a lot of messing around with numbering tokens (to a level that would be more work than just fixing up the references post-compile). The main problem is that there is no way to link to a note in the inspector, so even if the number of that note was known (which in theory it is since the compiler will add numbers to each note by default) there is no way to make use of it.

Thanks, Amber. That’s what I already feared.

Applications and writing environments in which this is possible (Mellel, LaTeX) work with bookmarks or labels of a type that doesn’t exist in Scrivener.

So under the given circumstances perhaps the best one can do is:

  • give a unique name or number to each note to which references have to be made, and put that name or number at the beginning of the note between square brackets, braces or something the like
  • refer elsewhere to the unique name or number of this note
  • at the very end of the composition process, delete all these unique names or numbers at the beginning of the notes, and replace them elsewhere with the final note numbers.

But this work-around remains far from ideal. Let’s hope a future version of Scrivener will offer some kind of solution for this, but I can imagine too that this issue is not on the very top of Keith’s list of priorities.