Feature Request: compile option for footnotes

This is an upshot of the odf-scan scan issue as described by epedrick, alawyer and myself.
https://forum.literatureandlatte.com/t/another-odf-compile-problem/22692/1
It looks as if epederick has found a way to avoid the weird font/formatting issue: by putting the bibiliographical cites directly into the body text (rather than having them as inline or inspector footnotes) avoids the formatting weirdness and lets Zotero’s odf-scan produce the actual footnotes in the final document – which then turn out orderly and responsive. This seems currently the best solution for something that can neither be changed form the developers of Zotero’s odf-scan-plugin nor from Scrivener’s side. (Maybe proper styles and the next gen .odt export may change that in the distant future.)

While this is all well and workable it leaves us with sizeable cite-markers in the actual body of the draft that are visually distracting. One simple solution would be to continue putting the cite-markers into the footnote (as several of us seem to be doing) thereby keeping our drafts clean and upon compile the footnotes could then be transformed at one fell swoop into ordinary bodytext and placed into the main text.

What would be needed: A compile option in the “Footnotes & Comments” section for something like “Transform inline/inspector footnotes to BodyText” that would insert the footnotes into the main text. Having the corresponding options also in the “Format” menus “Convert”-section would be a treat.
I hope this is reasonably clear. If not I’d be happy to elaborate. Thanks for considering.

I think this is something better resolved with the introduction of styles in a future version rather than by something that wouldn’t be of any use other than for a workaround for a specific situation that can already be worked around using external editors.

I’ve already made a note of the other thread as a reminder to myself to test for this problem when I do come to look at implementing styles.

All the best,
Keith

P.S. This really belongs in the “Wish List” forum. :slight_smile: