okay: what I want: I use Scrivener for academic writing. When I write, I use “Inline quotation” for references. Now, some publishers will ask for “inline quotation” others for “footnotes” BUT I do not always know which will be requested before the manuscript is submitted.
Problem: when I compile the “Inline Notes” become “footnotes.”
Now, I can use “inline annotations” but then if I need to convert to “footnotes” this is not possible.
Now, if it is a paper I can go through and changes these: BUT if it is a book project, then we are talking about a lot of notes.
QUESTIONS:
Am I right to assume that it is not possible to compline and have “inline notes” remain, well, inline? And if so, out of curiosity, why and could this be changed?
Is there a way to “automatically” convert all the inline annotations into inline footnotes?
Someone might have a snazzy solution for you, but…
I don’t know a way to fully automate this. Seems like something a good citation manager should facilitate, but I don’t think my Endnote does it. Plus, in my experience, the formatting of an in-text citation (often Author-year or Bib#) is generally not the same as the formatting of a footnote citation for those places that demand it (often full cite + ibid etc), so it is not just a matter of changing where the citation appears.
Edit > Find > Find by Formatting may be of some use to you. If you used inline-footnotes solely for your (maybe) inline citations and use inspector footnotes for other kind of footnotes, then using Edit > Find > Find by Formatting, you can easily walk through your inline footnotes, and de-footnote them with a key command. For an article this should be fine. For a book, tedious. And if you need to do this at all, you would need to duplicate your folder of body text before making the changes, so as to retain the original.
If my citations on the “inline” were: (NKC 13: 123) … then it would be moved to the footnote as such. Then a can write a macro to remove the brackets leaving: NKC 13: 123.
This is great IF I want them as footnotes: but then if that were the case, why not make them as footnotes from the beginning.
I guess I fail to understand the point of the “inline” notes if they end up as footnotes anyway.
Anyway, thanks that is what I expected someone would say.
Some people simply prefer to see their notes inline as they write.
Also, it’s possible to use inline notes and footnotes to give yourself two independent notestreams. For instance, you can use inline notes for explanatory footnotes, and inspector footnotes for bibliographical endnotes.
In any case no, there isn’t an option to have inline notes remain inline. What you can do, though, is have an inline annotation with a footnote right next to it, and use the Compile settings to omit the one you don’t want. (You’ll find the relevant options on the Settings tab in the righthand pane of the main Compile screen.)
I’m on Windows, so this may not work for you, but there are compile settings to chose converting footnotes. Maybe if you uncheck those you’d produce something like you want. It may be a long shot, but wanted to mention it anyway just in case.
I’m away from home and don’t have my computer, so can’t check, but…
I was going to suggest what @r6d2 says, and further point out serves, you can convert inline footnotes into inspector footnotes. So if I’m right, set up your compile as @r6d2 says, then when you know which the publisher wants, do the conversion as necessary.
And I second using a bibliography manager (Bookends for me, or Zotero) if you’re going to be serio.usabout bibliography and references.
To expand just a little bit on what has been suggested so far, and take it all the way to what you want, here is how I would approach it:
First, convert your inline footnote to inspector footnotes, via the Transformations command mentioned above. Do note that you can do this in bulk by loading the entire Draft in Scrivenings mode, putting the cursor anywhere in the editor, and running the command. (Mac-only, on Windows you have to go through section by section.)
Now use Navigate ▸ Inspect ▸ Footnotes & Comments to open the inspector to that tab.
Click anywhere on the headings in the list (not in the text of the notes as that will just start editing the text of one note), and press CtrlA/⌘A to select them all.
Right-click on the selection and “Convert to comments”.
You could stop there, but if you prefer inline notation as a way of working, then use the Transformations menu to convert them, this time to Inline Annotations. Note that the colour will carry over, roughly, so maybe experiment with one or two first, changing their colour in the right-click menu, before you get something you like—by default they will be much brighter than inline footnotes.
Why annotations or comments? Because those are more flexible!
Now, I can use “inline annotations” but then if I need to convert to “footnotes” this is not possible.
So, if you check that dropdown menu I’ve highlighted, you’ll find one of the options for inline annotations or comments is to indeed convert them to footnotes (or endnotes). So really, annotations & comments are the best tool to use all around if you don’t know for sure what you’ll eventually need them for.
Haha, because you said: “I do not always know which will be requested before the manuscript is submitted.”
So, we gather, you need to put them into a form that enables you to move most easily one way or the other as needed. (As always, AmberV has the snazz way to do it.)
if you cannot compile the document without making these into footnotes there is no choice of moving one way or another… it is at best a temporary tool …
I would be nice if Scrivener would provide an option in the compile to leave them in line or move them to footnotes…
I take it there is no solution … so let us end this thread…
AmberV pointed you to just such a solution. Set your citations as inline annotations (or comments). There is a compile setting you can switch on which will convert them all to footnotes in your output file, if that is what you need for a particular submission. Otherwise, they will appear inline as-is.
