Since I don’t see it mentioned in your post, have you been through the tutorial/demo of how to do this, near the top of the thread?
I’ll understand if it doesn’t work for how you wrote things, depending on that it might be too much work to switch to a different compile method, but for many works it wouldn’t be too much trouble.
The main difference with it is that the compiler side of things is much simpler. Questions such as how to restart footnotes are automatically no longer compiler questions, but rather something you would do with your word processor template.[1]
But as to that, for the built-in RTF-based conversion, the setting you are looking for is in the Footnotes & Comments compile format pane, with the Numbering setting. By default it is set to “Continuous”, but this can be changed to “Restarts each section”. ↩︎
I’m really enjoying this thread, as I have a Scrivener manuscript that needs an index. I tried AmberV’s method, and it works!. Thank you, AmberV.
But I have a problem: words identified as index terms on different pages of the manuscript don’t show different pages in the index. Instead I get this kind of result in the index: 1f. or 1 ff.—which apparently means page 1 and following on one other page, or page 1 and following on more than one other page.
Can the script shown on AmberV’s post on Oct 22 be changed to show the different page numbers where an index term appears in the manuscript.
I’m using Scrivener for Mac 3.3.6 and LibreOffice 24.8.0.3.
Thanks for any help.
Glad you got it sorted. And yes in general, layout and presentation decisions are going to be dictated by the document at a higher level than the markup that indicates where an anchor point is for an index term, and what that term is. All I am doing with the export format is saying: “this word right here should be in the index”. How the index is presented, how such terms are referenced and so on, is governed entirely by the index listing element that you insert in LibreOffice.
P.S. I’ve moved this over to the general discussion thread on indexing with these settings, as the other thread you had posted to was a very specific bug report.