# Extend Footnote to include 'annotations'

**URL:** https://meta.discourse.org/t/extend-footnote-to-include-annotations/230857
**Category:** Feature
**Tags:** footnote
**Created:** [June 13, 2022, 2:04pm UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/extend-footnote-to-include-annotations/230857 "2022-06-13T14:04:59Z")
**Posts on this page:** 1
**Showing post:** 5

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![roke\_julian\_lockhart](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/meta/user_avatar/meta.discourse.org/roke_julian_lockhart/32/540179_2.png) [@roke\_julian\_lockhart](https://meta.discourse.org/u/roke_julian_lockhart)
#### Post date: [October 26, 2025, 10:36am UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/extend-footnote-to-include-annotations/230857/5 "2025-10-26T10:36:50Z")

</div>

> [@mlgtechuser](#):
>
> It looks great in the editor’s Preview Pane, but doesn’t render as expected in the thread.

@mlgtechuser, if I’ve correctly understood, this may be an example of:

> [@Footnotes are not horizontally scrollable, yet their CSS does not force \`white-space: pre-wrap; word-wrap: break-word;\`](https://meta.discourse.org/t/footnotes-are-not-horizontally-scrollable-yet-their-css-does-not-force-white-space-pre-wrap-word-wrap-break-word/386727/1):
>
> [`forums.opensuse.org/t/187090/13`](https://forums.opensuse.org/t/how-to-perform-an-offline-update/187090/13)

If you try [`discussion.fedoraproject.org/new-topic`](https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/new-topic) instead, and enter:

```Markdown
[^1]

[^1]: Content

```

…you may see a more expected result, for the footnote renders as a bibiliographic citation (rather than an inline box, solely visible upon selection of its inline, numeric reference).

Otherwise, if you’re requesting that both modes coexist, thereby rendering some “annotations” bibliographic footnotes appended to the end of the document, with others remaining inline, I wholeheartedly agree that that would be phenomenal.

---

_[View the full topic](https://meta.discourse.org/t/extend-footnote-to-include-annotations/230857)._