# What is the correct syntax for subfootnote?

After upgrading from ConTeXt stable to beta, any code containing subfootnote does not compile. E.g.:

\definestructureconversionset [footnote] [numbers, Characters] [numbers]
\setupenumerations            [footnote] [numberconversionset=footnote]
\starttext
\startlines
This is some text.\footnote{This is a footnote.}
This is some more text.\subfootnote{This is a subfootnote.}
\stoplines
\stoptext


This code, adapted from How to set footnotes to use a combination of two numbering formats in ConTeXt?, fails to compile and returns an error on line 6, or essentially any line where \subfootnote is placed with the message "Missing number, treated as zero."

Similarly, \donote[subfootnote][]{} and \setnotetext[subfootnote][]{}, commands needed when placing subfootnotes inside mathmode environments, have problems compiling after this update.

• Has the syntax of \subfootnote been changed or entirely removed from ConTeXt beta? Is there a new way to typeset subfootnotes?
• Does the error "Missing number, treated as zero." indicate that I need to add a number somewhere to \subfootnote?
-
It looks like this changed in the release 2011.05.18. The release notes which includes a remark about "rewritten mark (header, footer etc. related) code". This question might be of some help. – Andrew Swann Aug 21 '12 at 13:51
I have tried changing the preamble to use \setupnotation[footnote][numberconversionset=footnote], however, the error about a missing number still appears for every line containing \subfootnote{}. – Village Aug 21 '12 at 23:56
Since this question has not been answered here for a while, the best option is to ask it on the ConTeXt mailing list. – Aditya Oct 11 '12 at 16:05
Congratulation, you are the winner! – kiss my armpit Oct 12 '12 at 14:10
@Village What, as exactly as possible, do you mean by “recently”? From the commit log I guess the bug was introduced when the note mechanism underwent the update from mkiv to mkvi earlier this year. This is when the code was changed that now fails. Unfortunately I cannot test this as the older versions of the format don’t build anymore. – Philipp Gesang Oct 13 '12 at 17:42

The syntax did not change. It is a bug and has been fixed in beta 2012.10.15 19:10 (see dev-context subfootnotes). An update should be enough to get subfootnotes working again.

However, you can use the MkIV syntax \startsubfootnote. So instead of

This is some text.\footnote{This is a footnote.}
This is some more text.\subfootnote{This is a subfootnote.}


you can write

This is some text.\startfootnote This is a footnote. \stopfootnote
This is some more text.\startsubfootnote This is a subfootnote. \stopsubfootnote


But this just as a side note, it is unrelated to the problem.

The syntax for the subfootnote numbering has changed. Instead of

\setupenumerations [footnote] [numberconversionset=footnote]


\setupnotation [footnote] [numberconversionset=footnote]


and \definestructureconversionset changed to \defineconversionset

\defineconversionset [footnote] [numbers, Characters] [numbers]