Endnote format

I’ve set the endnote format to A,B,C… and set comments to be exported as endnotes on compile. Instead comments come out with the 1,2,3… format. What do I need to do to get this to work.


Hi Eric,

Which program are you opening the resulting RTF file in? Not all word processors support the different styles of numbering. If you’re opening it in Word - which does support the different types of numbering - are you opening it in Word 2010? If so, there’s a bug in 2010 where it doesn’t read footnote styling from the RTF file from the right place, so currently different numbering styles only open right in Word 2004. I have worked around this bug for 2.1, which will be out in a few weeks, so that the different numbering styles will open fine in Word 2010 as well.

All the best,

Thanks, Keith.

Nisus Writer Pro 1.4.1.

This is not a big deal, as I export comments to endnotes only while I’m still editing, not for final print/publication. As it is now, though, both footnotes and comments/endnotes are identified in-text with the same number scheme. I can cope, but it would be convenient to be able to specify different schemes.

Ah, I don’t think Nisus supports different numbering schemes. Or at least, it seems to ignore the RTF settings for these. Can you set different numbering schemes for footnotes and endnotes in Nisus? If so, how do you do it? If it’s possible, then I can always e-mail Martin and see why it ignores the settings in RTF files exported from Scriv.

Thanks and all the best,

Thanks, Keith. As you can see, this is indeed not a priority issue for me. But, also indeed, Nisus does allow for different numbering schemes for endnotes.

It’s done through the stylesheets, or at least that’s how I did it. Click on the stylesheet view, click on endnotes, click on number format. You’ll get a drop down menu with all the usual suspects.

Thanks again,

Hi Eric,

Just to let you know that between me and Martin at Nisus, this should soon be fixed. I’ve addressed some issues in Scrivener’s RTF export that caused Nisus not to recognise the numbering type, and Martin has fixed a problem in Nisus whereby it would always use the same numbering type for footnotes and endnotes if one of the less common numbering types was used in the RTF file. So, the Scrivener 2.1 update will fix things on Scrivener’s side, and the next update to Nisus Writer Pro 2 will fix issues on Nisus’s side.

Thanks for bringing it to our attention.

All the best,

Nice, that reduces NWP’s compatibility problems by one, which I think puts it up there with Word for supporting all common features.

A bit late in getting back to this, Keith. I’m at the beginning of beginning to convert over to MMD/LaTeX/LyX for formatting and printing my documents. Hopefully there are people out there for whom Scrivener/Nisus endnote numbering fix will be helpful.

And it’s always possible that I’ll throw in the towel with MMD/LaTeX/LyX and go back to Nisus. It’s pretty intimidating for sure at this early stage.