Footnotes Missing?

[Robb B]

It appears that a number of footnotes are missing from the PNTC series volume on 1 Corinthians. One example (of several) is the section on 1 Corinthians 16:13-14. Nothing shows up in instant details when you hover over a note (note 42 for example), and clicking the link takes you to the very top of the module (to the beginning of the commentary on Matthew). 

[Steven S]

Hey @Robb B. Just wanted to confirm that I'm seeing the same behavior you described. However, in my version of the PNTC-15R3 module (1.0), the footnotes you referenced are present beginning on p. 867 (via the TOC, it is at First Corinthians > Commentary > VI. Letter Closing, 1Corinthians 16:1-24 > H. Paul’s Final Greeting and Farewell, 1Corinthians 16:21-24 > Footnotes). That is, instead of missing footnotes, they seem to simply be improperly linked (in both directions).

[Robb B]

Hey @Steven Sthat is incorrect. Those footnotes are only for 16:21-24. There are only 89 footnotes there, which is far short of how many there are in the entire commentary. 

[Dr. Nathan Parker]

Email your findings to me at nparker[at]accordancebible[dot]com (replace bracketed text with punctuation) and I'll have someone look into it.

 

Generally I'd recommend using Report Corrections (and you can still do that if you wish), but this sounds to be a little more in-depth than a handful of typos.

[darrylmy]

I can confirm that the links for the footnotes are broken like @Robb B mentioned, but I can also confirm that @Steven S is correct. For books that use footnotes, Accordance places them as endnotes (otherwise the footnotes would intervene within the running main body text), and in this case, the footnote numbering is restarted for the different sections (which is why there are only 89 footnotes in the section on 16:21–24).

[Robb B]

That is correct. The footnotes at the end of section 16:21-24 cover all of chapter 16, and the links are broken. For clarity’s sake, I would recommend breaking out the footnotes so that they are under the chapter heading rather than the subheading for 16:21-24. That would make it clear that the footnotes pertain to all of chapter 16 and not just that smaller section.