# Per-page footnotes and back-references

**URL:** <https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/per-page-footnotes-and-back-references/1547>\
**Category:** CSL Development\
**Created:** [July 7, 2019, 11:33am UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/per-page-footnotes-and-back-references/1547 "2019-07-07T11:33:05Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Frank\_Bennett](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/discourse.citationstyles.org/frank_bennett/32/198_2.png) [@Frank\_Bennett](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Frank_Bennett)\
**Post date:** [July 7, 2019, 11:33am UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/per-page-footnotes-and-back-references/1547/1 "2019-07-07T11:33:05Z")

</div>

A user on the Zotero forms recently [reported a processor failure](https://forums.zotero.org/discussion/78123/libreoffice-footnotes-counted-per-page-causes-zotero-failure) in LibreOffice when a setting is changed to per-page footnote numbering. The error was triggered by [input validation code](https://github.com/Juris-M/citeproc-js/commit/4801a918067347f1327df07ae3a879b5c1c6b9b9) that I added to the processor a couple of months ago, which requires note numbers fed to the processor to be sequential. Zotero have circumvented the error in the latest LibreOffice plugin by [reporting out the document index of footnotes](https://github.com/zotero/zotero-libreoffice-integration/commit/bb21e3c150994254d41003c39a5a0a5ba9ca2188) to `properties.noteIndex` in citation input. That will work, but the value of `first-reference-note-number` will no longer be aligned with note numbers.

There isn’t any way to handle this use case properly in CSL 1.0.1, and I won’t be doing anything to extend `citeproc-js` to cope with it. I just mention it as a general development issue for the time when the CSL schema comes to be revised.