Welcome to Codidact Meta!
Codidact Meta is the "town hall" (meta-discussion site) for the Codidact community network and the Codidact software. Whether you have bug reports or feature requests, support questions or rule discussions that touch the whole network – this is the site for you.
Post History
Codidact uses CommonMark for Markdown, which has an extension that supports footnotes using the following format: Sentence with a footnote[^1] in it. [^1]: The content of the footnote. This ...
#7: Post edited
by
trichoplax
·
2026-06-03T14:16:50Z (4 months ago)
Reduce confusion by augmenting wording
- Codidact uses [CommonMark](https://commonmark.org/) for Markdown, which has an extension that supports footnotes using the following format:
- ```md
- Sentence with a footnote[^1] in it.
- [^1]: The content of the footnote.
- ```
- This renders as:
- > Sentence with a footnote[^1] in it.
- [^1]: The content of the footnote.
- Note that the footnote is automatically rendered as a link to the footnote at the bottom of this post, and the footnote at the bottom of this post automatically ends with a link back to the position in the text that referred to it.
Such footnotes can be used in both posts and comments (see the [example footnote thread](https://meta.codidact.com/comments/thread/11862) below this post). However, in a post the link to the footnote shows in square brackets, as `[1]` whereas in a comment the link to the footnote shows as a lone number, as `1`.- I don't have a strong preference on which format should be used, but I would expect the format to be consistent between posts and comments.
- Do you have a preference on which format should be used?
- Codidact uses [CommonMark](https://commonmark.org/) for Markdown, which has an extension that supports footnotes using the following format:
- ```md
- Sentence with a footnote[^1] in it.
- [^1]: The content of the footnote.
- ```
- This renders as:
- > Sentence with a footnote[^1] in it.
- [^1]: The content of the footnote.
- Note that the footnote is automatically rendered as a link to the footnote at the bottom of this post, and the footnote at the bottom of this post automatically ends with a link back to the position in the text that referred to it.
- Such footnotes can be used in both posts and comments (see the [example footnote thread](https://meta.codidact.com/comments/thread/11862) below this post). However, in a post the superscript link to the footnote shows in square brackets, as `[1]` whereas in a comment the superscript link to the footnote shows as a lone number, as `1`.
- I don't have a strong preference on which format should be used, but I would expect the format to be consistent between posts and comments.
- Do you have a preference on which format should be used?
#6: Post edited
by
trichoplax
·
2026-05-26T00:48:09Z (4 months ago)
Mention that footnotes are an extension to CommonMark
Codidact uses [CommonMark](https://commonmark.org/) for Markdown, which supports footnotes using the following format:- ```md
- Sentence with a footnote[^1] in it.
- [^1]: The content of the footnote.
- ```
- This renders as:
- > Sentence with a footnote[^1] in it.
- [^1]: The content of the footnote.
- Note that the footnote is automatically rendered as a link to the footnote at the bottom of this post, and the footnote at the bottom of this post automatically ends with a link back to the position in the text that referred to it.
- Such footnotes can be used in both posts and comments (see the [example footnote thread](https://meta.codidact.com/comments/thread/11862) below this post). However, in a post the link to the footnote shows in square brackets, as `[1]` whereas in a comment the link to the footnote shows as a lone number, as `1`.
- I don't have a strong preference on which format should be used, but I would expect the format to be consistent between posts and comments.
- Do you have a preference on which format should be used?
- Codidact uses [CommonMark](https://commonmark.org/) for Markdown, which has an extension that supports footnotes using the following format:
- ```md
- Sentence with a footnote[^1] in it.
- [^1]: The content of the footnote.
- ```
- This renders as:
- > Sentence with a footnote[^1] in it.
- [^1]: The content of the footnote.
- Note that the footnote is automatically rendered as a link to the footnote at the bottom of this post, and the footnote at the bottom of this post automatically ends with a link back to the position in the text that referred to it.
- Such footnotes can be used in both posts and comments (see the [example footnote thread](https://meta.codidact.com/comments/thread/11862) below this post). However, in a post the link to the footnote shows in square brackets, as `[1]` whereas in a comment the link to the footnote shows as a lone number, as `1`.
- I don't have a strong preference on which format should be used, but I would expect the format to be consistent between posts and comments.
- Do you have a preference on which format should be used?
#5: Post edited
by
trichoplax
·
2026-05-26T00:31:55Z (4 months ago)
Revert to linking to the full thread since linking to its footnote does not automatically open the thread in page.
- Codidact uses [CommonMark](https://commonmark.org/) for Markdown, which supports footnotes using the following format:
- ```md
- Sentence with a footnote[^1] in it.
- [^1]: The content of the footnote.
- ```
- This renders as:
- > Sentence with a footnote[^1] in it.
- [^1]: The content of the footnote.
- Note that the footnote is automatically rendered as a link to the footnote at the bottom of this post, and the footnote at the bottom of this post automatically ends with a link back to the position in the text that referred to it.
Such footnotes can be used in both posts and comments (see the [example footnote thread](https://meta.codidact.com/posts/296196#fnref-1) below this post). However, in a post the link to the footnote shows in square brackets, as `[1]` whereas in a comment the link to the footnote shows as a lone number, as `1`.- I don't have a strong preference on which format should be used, but I would expect the format to be consistent between posts and comments.
- Do you have a preference on which format should be used?
- Codidact uses [CommonMark](https://commonmark.org/) for Markdown, which supports footnotes using the following format:
- ```md
- Sentence with a footnote[^1] in it.
- [^1]: The content of the footnote.
- ```
- This renders as:
- > Sentence with a footnote[^1] in it.
- [^1]: The content of the footnote.
- Note that the footnote is automatically rendered as a link to the footnote at the bottom of this post, and the footnote at the bottom of this post automatically ends with a link back to the position in the text that referred to it.
- Such footnotes can be used in both posts and comments (see the [example footnote thread](https://meta.codidact.com/comments/thread/11862) below this post). However, in a post the link to the footnote shows in square brackets, as `[1]` whereas in a comment the link to the footnote shows as a lone number, as `1`.
- I don't have a strong preference on which format should be used, but I would expect the format to be consistent between posts and comments.
- Do you have a preference on which format should be used?
#4: Post edited
by
trichoplax
·
2026-05-26T00:29:54Z (4 months ago)
Make link to thread open in page rather than linking to a separate full thread page
- Codidact uses [CommonMark](https://commonmark.org/) for Markdown, which supports footnotes using the following format:
- ```md
- Sentence with a footnote[^1] in it.
- [^1]: The content of the footnote.
- ```
- This renders as:
- > Sentence with a footnote[^1] in it.
- [^1]: The content of the footnote.
- Note that the footnote is automatically rendered as a link to the footnote at the bottom of this post, and the footnote at the bottom of this post automatically ends with a link back to the position in the text that referred to it.
Such footnotes can be used in both posts and comments (see the [example footnote thread](https://meta.codidact.com/comments/thread/11862#comment-29433) below this post). However, in a post the link to the footnote shows in square brackets, as `[1]` whereas in a comment the link to the footnote shows as a lone number, as `1`.- I don't have a strong preference on which format should be used, but I would expect the format to be consistent between posts and comments.
- Do you have a preference on which format should be used?
- Codidact uses [CommonMark](https://commonmark.org/) for Markdown, which supports footnotes using the following format:
- ```md
- Sentence with a footnote[^1] in it.
- [^1]: The content of the footnote.
- ```
- This renders as:
- > Sentence with a footnote[^1] in it.
- [^1]: The content of the footnote.
- Note that the footnote is automatically rendered as a link to the footnote at the bottom of this post, and the footnote at the bottom of this post automatically ends with a link back to the position in the text that referred to it.
- Such footnotes can be used in both posts and comments (see the [example footnote thread](https://meta.codidact.com/posts/296196#fnref-1) below this post). However, in a post the link to the footnote shows in square brackets, as `[1]` whereas in a comment the link to the footnote shows as a lone number, as `1`.
- I don't have a strong preference on which format should be used, but I would expect the format to be consistent between posts and comments.
- Do you have a preference on which format should be used?
#3: Post edited
by
trichoplax
·
2026-05-26T00:26:07Z (4 months ago)
Link to CommonMark
Codidact uses CommonMark for Markdown, which supports footnotes using the following format:- ```md
- Sentence with a footnote[^1] in it.
- [^1]: The content of the footnote.
- ```
- This renders as:
- > Sentence with a footnote[^1] in it.
- [^1]: The content of the footnote.
- Note that the footnote is automatically rendered as a link to the footnote at the bottom of this post, and the footnote at the bottom of this post automatically ends with a link back to the position in the text that referred to it.
- Such footnotes can be used in both posts and comments (see the [example footnote thread](https://meta.codidact.com/comments/thread/11862#comment-29433) below this post). However, in a post the link to the footnote shows in square brackets, as `[1]` whereas in a comment the link to the footnote shows as a lone number, as `1`.
- I don't have a strong preference on which format should be used, but I would expect the format to be consistent between posts and comments.
- Do you have a preference on which format should be used?
- Codidact uses [CommonMark](https://commonmark.org/) for Markdown, which supports footnotes using the following format:
- ```md
- Sentence with a footnote[^1] in it.
- [^1]: The content of the footnote.
- ```
- This renders as:
- > Sentence with a footnote[^1] in it.
- [^1]: The content of the footnote.
- Note that the footnote is automatically rendered as a link to the footnote at the bottom of this post, and the footnote at the bottom of this post automatically ends with a link back to the position in the text that referred to it.
- Such footnotes can be used in both posts and comments (see the [example footnote thread](https://meta.codidact.com/comments/thread/11862#comment-29433) below this post). However, in a post the link to the footnote shows in square brackets, as `[1]` whereas in a comment the link to the footnote shows as a lone number, as `1`.
- I don't have a strong preference on which format should be used, but I would expect the format to be consistent between posts and comments.
- Do you have a preference on which format should be used?
#2: Post edited
by
trichoplax
·
2026-05-26T00:23:53Z (4 months ago)
Link to example footnote thread
- Codidact uses CommonMark for Markdown, which supports footnotes using the following format:
- ```md
- Sentence with a footnote[^1] in it.
- [^1]: The content of the footnote.
- ```
- This renders as:
- > Sentence with a footnote[^1] in it.
- [^1]: The content of the footnote.
- Note that the footnote is automatically rendered as a link to the footnote at the bottom of this post, and the footnote at the bottom of this post automatically ends with a link back to the position in the text that referred to it.
Such footnotes can be used in both posts and comments (see the [example footnote thread]() below this post). However, in a post the link to the footnote shows in square brackets, as `[1]` whereas in a comment the link to the footnote shows as a lone number, as `1`.- I don't have a strong preference on which format should be used, but I would expect the format to be consistent between posts and comments.
- Do you have a preference on which format should be used?
- Codidact uses CommonMark for Markdown, which supports footnotes using the following format:
- ```md
- Sentence with a footnote[^1] in it.
- [^1]: The content of the footnote.
- ```
- This renders as:
- > Sentence with a footnote[^1] in it.
- [^1]: The content of the footnote.
- Note that the footnote is automatically rendered as a link to the footnote at the bottom of this post, and the footnote at the bottom of this post automatically ends with a link back to the position in the text that referred to it.
- Such footnotes can be used in both posts and comments (see the [example footnote thread](https://meta.codidact.com/comments/thread/11862#comment-29433) below this post). However, in a post the link to the footnote shows in square brackets, as `[1]` whereas in a comment the link to the footnote shows as a lone number, as `1`.
- I don't have a strong preference on which format should be used, but I would expect the format to be consistent between posts and comments.
- Do you have a preference on which format should be used?
#1: Initial revision
by
trichoplax
·
2026-05-26T00:22:20Z (4 months ago)
Inconsistent formatting of footnotes between posts and comments
Codidact uses CommonMark for Markdown, which supports footnotes using the following format: ```md Sentence with a footnote[^1] in it. [^1]: The content of the footnote. ``` This renders as: > Sentence with a footnote[^1] in it. [^1]: The content of the footnote. Note that the footnote is automatically rendered as a link to the footnote at the bottom of this post, and the footnote at the bottom of this post automatically ends with a link back to the position in the text that referred to it. Such footnotes can be used in both posts and comments (see the [example footnote thread]() below this post). However, in a post the link to the footnote shows in square brackets, as `[1]` whereas in a comment the link to the footnote shows as a lone number, as `1`. I don't have a strong preference on which format should be used, but I would expect the format to be consistent between posts and comments. Do you have a preference on which format should be used?