First of all I would like to say that Scrivener is not a great, but an extraordinary piece of software, which was released precisely around the time when I was searching for such a one; I use it all the time and completely abandoned the Windows computer now.

Apparently this is a wish list forum so I guess there is nothing wrong with being picky; sorry if this has already been asked for, I read some threads and silently followed your discussions for some time, but definitely did not read the whole forum either. My concern is about footnotes, not how to export them or make them look good, these features seem pretty functional especially with MultiMarkdown and LaTex.

I usually dislike when others use footnotes, but am myself a heavy user (the real story is: I can write them smaller so my papers fit the maximum number of pages with more content if needed); and I even differentiate between two kinds of footnotes. The first being a mere citation, like “See …” with perhaps a quote; and the second being some kind of remark or explanation on the current sentence; or if working on book transcriptions, the original notes of the author and the edition notes I need to add from times to times. The thing is, 1. I wish to differentiate between them immediately (different colours), because one kind is directly part of the text whereas the other could be neglected by the reader; 2. I can have to export the text with one kind of notes and not the other or vice-versa; 3. I currently use “footnotes” for the ones and “annotations” for the others, but obviously neither are real “annotations”, and this is very time consuming when you do the post-production (sorry, I am French, there is probably a better word).

So… Would there be a way to have different kinds of footnotes, with different colours, and that can work independently from each other if one wants to? :blush: This could probably be helpful too for people writing textbooks or other: with footnotes for immediate explanation, endnotes for citations and references, ‘boxes’ for witty remarks, other ‘boxes’ for definitions, etc. I am not saying two hundred different kinds of footnotes, but two or three to play with could be nice.

Traditionally, citations are actually handled as Endnotes, and asides/commentary/annotations to the current text as footnotes.

I suggest you continue using Scriv’s footnote feature for your assides/commentary, and look into some citations software such as EndNote, Bookends, or…umm…Senti (is that what it’s called?). All of these will integrate with Scrivener by leaving citation tags in the text, which can be used to generate real endnote/citation setups in the final exported draft.

Thank you for your answer, though I am not sure to fully understand it.

Sorry if my expression was not most clear; what I meant is, would there be a way to export annotations (or have something that does this function, whatever it be called) not as red text between brackets, but rather as a form of footnotes/margin notes/end notes either with their distinct sign. The reason why I am asking is that for example, when giving citations, I often happen to actually give a whole quote that would not be necessary in the text but can nevertheless be useful to the reader, and probably Bibdesk (since I am using it) is not going to do it (though… maybe?). But in this case it is also useful to actually be able to see (and/or mask with the Ghostnotes) the note/citation directly in Scrivener, and not as a simple tag written in black in the middle of a black text.