[updated test cases
Panu Kalliokoski <atehwa@sange.fi>**20110214081418
 Ignore-this: 3a40169805e71a5f013e02aa03a700f3
] {
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.docbook-xml 10
-<Sect1><Title><Anchor id="Testing.link.abbreviations"/>Testing link abbreviations</Title>
+<Para>Does the old-style footnote<Footnote><Para>such as this one here</Para></Footnote> work anymore in
+the presence of link abbreviations<Footnote><Para>as tested by this file</Para></Footnote>?<Footnote><Para>And
+does it work if broken into
+multiple lines?</Para></Footnote>
+
+</Para><Sect1><Title><Anchor id="Testing.link.abbreviations"/>Testing link abbreviations</Title>
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.docbook-xml 37
-lines, exactly as demonstrated here<Footnote><Para>which is marvellous, of course</Para></Footnote>.
-Another thing to test is whether you can have a link like this<Footnote><Para>like,
-having a long link tag</Para></Footnote>.
+lines, exactly as demonstrated here<Footnote><Para>which is marvellous, or course</Para></Footnote>.
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.docbook-xml 51
-</Para><Para>Does the old-style footnote<Footnote><Para>such as this one here</Para></Footnote> work anymore in
-the presence of link abbreviations<Footnote><Para>as tested by this file</Para></Footnote>?<Footnote><Para>And
-does it work if broken into
-multiple lines?</Para></Footnote>
-
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.html 11
+<p>Does the old-style footnote<small>[1]</small> work anymore in
+the presence of link abbreviations<small>[2]</small>?<small>[3]</small>
+<p><small>[1]</small> such as this one here<br>
+<small>[2]</small> as tested by this file<br>
+<small>[3]</small> And
+does it work if broken into
+multiple lines?<br>
+
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.html 26
-<small>[1]</small> block.  Do we manage it?
-<p><small>[1]</small> linkdata<br>
+<small>[4]</small> block.  Do we manage it?
+<p><small>[4]</small> linkdata<br>
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.html 31
-they all <a href="http://www.meaning.org/">mean</a>.  <small>[2]</small>.
-<p><small>[2]</small> This is a longer footnote,
+they all <a href="http://www.meaning.org/">mean</a>.  <small>[5]</small>.
+<p><small>[5]</small> This is a longer footnote,
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.html 36
-<a href="#RFC2396">URIs</a> is that you<small>[3]</small> have hard time knowing where they stop.
+<a href="#RFC2396">URIs</a> is that you<small>[6]</small> have hard time knowing where they stop.
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.html 38
-the colon not<small>[4]</small>?  (Another example is
+the colon not<small>[7]</small>?  (Another example is
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.html 41
-lines, exactly as demonstrated here<small>[5]</small>.
-Another thing to test is whether you can have a link like this<small>[6]</small>.
-<p><small>[3]</small> the reader<br>
-<small>[4]</small> Don't tell me that properly quoted URI's won't have colons in
+lines, exactly as demonstrated here<small>[8]</small>.
+<p><small>[6]</small> the reader<br>
+<small>[7]</small> Don't tell me that properly quoted URI's won't have colons in
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.html 46
-<small>[5]</small> which is marvellous, of course<br>
-<small>[6]</small> like,
-having a long link tag<br>
+<small>[8]</small> which is marvellous, or course<br>
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.html 49
-<small>[7]</small> cases of borderline cases between
+<small>[9]</small> cases of borderline cases between
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.html 51
-<a href="../common/linking.lsed">link syntaces</a> at the beginning of <small>[8]</small>[].
-<p><small>[7]</small> See e.g. <a href="../common/removelinkdata.lsed">removal of link data blocks</a><br>
-<small>[8]</small> lines<br>
+<a href="../common/linking.lsed">link syntaces</a> at the beginning of <small>[10]</small>[].
+<p><small>[9]</small> See e.g. <a href="../common/removelinkdata.lsed">removal of link data blocks</a><br>
+<small>[10]</small> lines<br>
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.html 59
-<p>Does the old-style footnote<small>[9]</small> work anymore in
-the presence of link abbreviations<small>[10]</small>?<small>[11]</small>
-<p><small>[9]</small> such as this one here<br>
-<small>[10]</small> as tested by this file<br>
-<small>[11]</small> And
-does it work if broken into
-multiple lines?<br>
-
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.latex 14
+Does the old-style footnote\footnote{such as this one here} work anymore in
+the presence of link abbreviations\footnote{as tested by this file}?\footnote{And
+does it work if broken into
+multiple lines?}
+
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.latex 41
-lines, exactly as demonstrated here\footnote{which is marvellous, of course}.
-Another thing to test is whether you can have a link like this\footnote{like,
-having a long link tag}.
+lines, exactly as demonstrated here\footnote{which is marvellous, or course}.
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.latex 52
-Does the old-style footnote\footnote{such as this one here} work anymore in
-the presence of link abbreviations\footnote{as tested by this file}?\footnote{And
-does it work if broken into
-multiple lines?}
-
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.man 2
+.PP
+Does the old-style footnote\&
+.SM [1]
+\& work anymore in
+the presence of link abbreviations\&
+.SM [2]
+\&?\&
+.SM [3]
+\&
+.br
+\&
+.SM [1]
+\& such as this one here
+.br
+\&
+.SM [2]
+\& as tested by this file
+.br
+\&
+.SM [3]
+\& And
+does it work if broken into
+multiple lines?
+.br
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.man 34
-.SM [1]
+.SM [4]
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.man 38
-.SM [1]
+.SM [4]
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.man 43
-.SM [2]
+.SM [5]
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.man 45
-.SM [3]
+.SM [6]
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.man 49
-.SM [4]
+.SM [7]
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.man 51
-.SM [5]
+.SM [8]
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.man 55
-.SM [2]
+.SM [5]
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.man 59
-.SM [3]
+.SM [6]
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.man 63
-.SM [4]
+.SM [7]
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.man 67
-.SM [5]
+.SM [8]
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.man 74
-.SM [6]
+.SM [9]
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.man 78
-.SM [7]
+.SM [10]
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.man 83
-.SM [8]
-\&.
-Another thing to test is whether you can have a link like this\&
-.SM [9]
+.SM [11]
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.man 87
-.SM [6]
+.SM [9]
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.man 91
-.SM [7]
+.SM [10]
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.man 97
-.SM [8]
-\& which is marvellous, of course
-.br
-\&
-.SM [9]
-\& like,
-having a long link tag
+.SM [11]
+\& which is marvellous, or course
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.man 103
-.SM [10]
+.SM [12]
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.man 107
-.SM [12]
+.SM [14]
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.man 109
-.SM [13]
+.SM [15]
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.man 113
-.SM [10]
+.SM [12]
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.man 115
-.SM [11]
+.SM [13]
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.man 117
-.SM [11]
+.SM [13]
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.man 123
-.SM [12]
+.SM [14]
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.man 127
-.SM [13]
+.SM [15]
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.man 135
-.SM [14]
+.SM [16]
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.man 138
-.SM [15]
-\&.
-.br
-\&
-.SM [14]
-\& ./foo.html
-.br
-\&
-.SM [15]
-\& ../index.html
-.br
-.PP
-Does the old-style footnote\&
-.SM [16]
-\& work anymore in
-the presence of link abbreviations\&
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.man 139
-\&?\&
-.SM [18]
-\&
+\&.
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.man 143
-\& such as this one here
+\& ./foo.html
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.man 147
-\& as tested by this file
-.br
-\&
-.SM [18]
-\& And
-does it work if broken into
-multiple lines?
+\& ../index.html
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.test 3
+Does the old-style footnote[[ such as this one here ]] work anymore in
+the presence of link abbreviations[[-as tested by this file-]]?[[ And
+does it work if broken into
+multiple lines? ]]
+
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.test 33
+[thereader] the reader
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.test 36
-URIs[RFC2396] is that you[the reader] have hard time knowing where they stop.
+URIs[RFC2396] is that you[thereader] have hard time knowing where they stop.
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.test 41
-lines, exactly as demonstrated here][which is marvellous, of course].
-Another thing to test is whether you can have a link like this[like,
-having a long link tag].
+lines, exactly as demonstrated here][fn32].
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.test 54
+[linkdata] linkdata
+[lines] lines
+[fn32] which is marvellous, or course
hunk ./regression/link-abbrev.test 62
-Does the old-style footnote[[ such as this one here ]] work anymore in
-the presence of link abbreviations[[-as tested by this file-]]?[[ And
-does it work if broken into
-multiple lines? ]]
-
}