Rich Text Support

[sandrodunkel]

What are you trying to do?

It would be nice if we would be able to add rich text functionality inside the footnotes. We often require <a>, <sup>, <i> etc. in our footnotes – right now we have to actually write these tags as html in the plain text footnotes and then decode the tags in the frontend.

What's your proposed solution?

In a perfect world there would be a CKEditor inside the footnotes popup and somewhere in the plugin settings we can create a custom CKE config (can also be file-based, doesn't have to feature the same UI as a CKE field). But I don't know wether that's feasible.

Additional context

No response

[dlindberg]

I also could use this feature. I currently am using carlcs/craft-footnote and think I will need to migrate to your plugin given it seems to be more consistently mantained. One of the things that the other plugin does is allow for passing footnotes as a reference to a separate matrix field on the entry (this gets complicated because of how things can be nested). But it does allow for complex footnotes, including with links and styling as well as multi paragraph footnotes. Our site is in the legal filed and our footnotes are not simple by any stretch. Unfortunately given the current usage and update history on footnote, I think it will be a while before a craft CKEditor 5 compatible version of footnote comes out, if it does.

I have some custom code for dealing with the rathe complicated way footnotes are handled on our site, so I expect I'll be able to migrate things and force the plugin to work the way I need it too, but would certainly appreciate a more elegant solution and inline editing for all notes would be superior solution if it could handle more complex notes. Currently I allow in footnotes: Bold, Italic, Strikethrough, superscript, subscript, links, and paragraphs. I've considered using markdown as an approach for this but I have enough content authors that would struggle with that that I'm not sure it is a viable path..

[sandrodunkel]

We're using it in a legal context as well, so links, italic and superscript are absolutely necessary for us as well. We thought about using markdown too, but as you mentioned it's unlikely that an average editor nowadays would now how to use it. Since it's mostly static content on our end we took the initial burden off the client and just wrote HTML tags in the footnote field. But that's neither pretty to use nor a viable solution for client editors.