8 ms·

Can anyone explain why everyone on HN seems to use footnotes even in short comments with a single link which follows the aforementioned footnote? It's not a ja

Can anyone explain why everyone on HN seems to use footnotes even in short comments with a single link which follows the aforementioned footnote? It's not a jab at the parent comment, I am simply interested if it's some kind of cargo cult, or I may be missing something here.

deegles 6y ago
I think it's just convention, it's been like that as long as I can remember.
jayshua 6y ago
Because we're programmers. Edit: In my head what I was trying to say was obvious. In hindsight it's not. The practice started because text interspersed with long urls is difficult to read. It's a good solution, so everyone started doing it all the time. It's done in situations like this where it isn't strictly necessary probably because most of us are programmers and don't like making exceptions to a rule for specific circumstances. That's the theory I'm going with anyway.
- ethbro 6y ago
  Which I guess sums as "If not that, then what?" And I haven't seen any alternate methods that seem superior and standard enough to follow instead.
tomrod 6y ago
We also zero index, as all counters should. But seriously, footnotes keep the text cleaner.
- ethbro 6y ago
  I'd never considered this in my footnote indexing, but you make a valid point! I'll internalize that as Personal Rule 0 going forward.
- laqq3 6y ago
  I think zero makes sense as array indices when it refers to an offset as some kind. But I find it more intuitive for counters to start at one, in line with colloquial ('1st' and 'first') and mathematical usage.
  - tomrod 6y ago
    First is arbitrary. We could use binary encoded using swallows mentioned in Monty Python. But I digress :)
pests 6y ago
I do it too and it's just habit. I have no idea how many articles or sources I want to cite or mention so they just get numbered. As for the footnote vs inline style I find ugly urls a distraction while reading and it's easy enough to match up footnote numbers.
TheHideout 6y ago
As an academic, it feels natural and organized for me.
nicoburns 6y ago
I think it partly comes from Markdown which will convert links written in this style into inline-links with custom link text. HN doesn't actually support this style of markdown, but I believe Reddit does.
- hunter2_ 6y ago
  Markdown was created in 2004. Using footnotes for URLs likely goes back to near the creation of the web itself (1989~1991) -- not on web pages necessarily (but see Wikipedia for counterexample) but in plaintext discussions about web pages, such as in newsgroups. It's similar to the way markdown allows for text decoration via asterisks (strong) and underscores (emphasis): people used such plaintext decorations long before any expectation that it could lead to more typical presentations such as bold and italic (italic and underline are grammatically interchangeable, and underscores approximate an underline).
  - ramses0 6y ago
    Remembering that Markdown effectively started as a "discovered" syntax instead of an "invented" syntax. ``` Readability, however, is emphasized above all else. A Markdown-formatted document should be publishable as-is, as plain text, without looking like it’s been marked up with tags or formatting instructions. While Markdown’s syntax has been influenced by several existing text-to-HTML filters — including Setext, atx, Textile, reStructuredText, Grutatext, and EtText — the single biggest source of inspiration for Markdown’s syntax is the format of plain text email. To this end, Markdown’s syntax is comprised entirely of punctuation characters, which punctuation characters have been carefully chosen so as to look like what they mean. E.g., asterisks around a word actually look like emphasis. Markdown lists look like, well, lists. Even blockquotes look like quoted passages of text, assuming you’ve ever used email. ``` ...at its core, Markdown was a codification of decades of habits found in README.txt files, and "footnote-style links" were unusual but relatively frequently used. They could be with numbers[0] or referring to a short abbreviation like [daring-fireball], and very likely the true origin was how a type-written page would have handled a footnote or reference. [0]: http://example.com/ http://example.com/ [daring-fireball]: https://daringfireball.com/ https://daringfireball.com/
coldpie 6y ago
It's a way to do hyperlinked text when true hyperlinked text is not available. Links in mid-text are really annoying, so we replace them with a 'footnote'. I agree it's a little bizarre when it's a single line of text with a single link, but it's just the same pattern.
SonOfLilit 6y ago
The most accurate answer would be "HN started as a community of fans of Paul Graham's essays, and this is the syntax he uses in his essays, so this style was imported to HN and thrives to this day".
- maccard 6y ago
  It's also the standard format for non-pg essays, and published content. And, as hyperlinks aren't available in HN comments, this is the least disruptive way to insert text.
  - SonOfLilit 6y ago
    Specifically [1]-style footnotes weren't popular in the early days of HN, but everyone on HN used them. I guess today I see them a lot more all over the web. [1] footnote
war1025 6y ago
I do it because it's the easiest way to link to something without ruining the flow of the text.
skocznymroczny 6y ago
I feel like often people do it to make their comment look smarter, as if your every reply is a miniature academic paper.
- andrewzah 6y ago
  I suppose charitable interpretations are just not an option, then? Long links in the middle of sentences or paragraphs are annoying. Since HN doesn't allow hyperlinking, having a list of links at the bottom is the least disruptive option.
ponker 6y ago
Inline raw links are annoying to read because either the link is properly constructed and just repeats the text leading up to it, or is a horrible mess of tracking GUIDs. Since most people aren’t going to click the link it serves more people to get the link out of the way.
MereInterest 6y ago
As I'm writing a comment, I don't know how many links I will include. If I need to go back and edit it for the special case of N=1, that is additional effort.
young_unixer 6y ago
Even when it's just one link, it looks better as a reference than a random URL floating around in the text (or after it).
_Microft 6y ago
I do not like the cluttered look of links interspersed throughout the text and it is not even clear that they provide value for most of the readers. This is why I prefer to collect them at the end, one per line for those who actually want to look them up.

deegles 6y ago

I think it's just convention, it's been like that as long as I can remember.

jayshua 6y ago

Because we're programmers. Edit: In my head what I was trying to say was obvious. In hindsight it's not. The practice started because text interspersed with long urls is difficult to read. It's a good solution, so everyone started doing it all the time. It's done in situations like this where it isn't strictly necessary probably because most of us are programmers and don't like making exceptions to a rule for specific circumstances. That's the theory I'm going with anyway.

ethbro 6y ago
Which I guess sums as "If not that, then what?" And I haven't seen any alternate methods that seem superior and standard enough to follow instead.

tomrod 6y ago

We also zero index, as all counters should. But seriously, footnotes keep the text cleaner.

ethbro 6y ago
I'd never considered this in my footnote indexing, but you make a valid point! I'll internalize that as Personal Rule 0 going forward.
laqq3 6y ago
I think zero makes sense as array indices when it refers to an offset as some kind. But I find it more intuitive for counters to start at one, in line with colloquial ('1st' and 'first') and mathematical usage.
- tomrod 6y ago
  First is arbitrary. We could use binary encoded using swallows mentioned in Monty Python. But I digress :)

pests 6y ago

I do it too and it's just habit. I have no idea how many articles or sources I want to cite or mention so they just get numbered. As for the footnote vs inline style I find ugly urls a distraction while reading and it's easy enough to match up footnote numbers.

TheHideout 6y ago

As an academic, it feels natural and organized for me.

nicoburns 6y ago

I think it partly comes from Markdown which will convert links written in this style into inline-links with custom link text. HN doesn't actually support this style of markdown, but I believe Reddit does.

hunter2_ 6y ago
Markdown was created in 2004. Using footnotes for URLs likely goes back to near the creation of the web itself (1989~1991) -- not on web pages necessarily (but see Wikipedia for counterexample) but in plaintext discussions about web pages, such as in newsgroups. It's similar to the way markdown allows for text decoration via asterisks (strong) and underscores (emphasis): people used such plaintext decorations long before any expectation that it could lead to more typical presentations such as bold and italic (italic and underline are grammatically interchangeable, and underscores approximate an underline).
- ramses0 6y ago
  Remembering that Markdown effectively started as a "discovered" syntax instead of an "invented" syntax. ``` Readability, however, is emphasized above all else. A Markdown-formatted document should be publishable as-is, as plain text, without looking like it’s been marked up with tags or formatting instructions. While Markdown’s syntax has been influenced by several existing text-to-HTML filters — including Setext, atx, Textile, reStructuredText, Grutatext, and EtText — the single biggest source of inspiration for Markdown’s syntax is the format of plain text email. To this end, Markdown’s syntax is comprised entirely of punctuation characters, which punctuation characters have been carefully chosen so as to look like what they mean. E.g., asterisks around a word actually look like emphasis. Markdown lists look like, well, lists. Even blockquotes look like quoted passages of text, assuming you’ve ever used email. ``` ...at its core, Markdown was a codification of decades of habits found in README.txt files, and "footnote-style links" were unusual but relatively frequently used. They could be with numbers[0] or referring to a short abbreviation like [daring-fireball], and very likely the true origin was how a type-written page would have handled a footnote or reference. [0]: http://example.com/ http://example.com/ [daring-fireball]: https://daringfireball.com/ https://daringfireball.com/

coldpie 6y ago

It's a way to do hyperlinked text when true hyperlinked text is not available. Links in mid-text are really annoying, so we replace them with a 'footnote'. I agree it's a little bizarre when it's a single line of text with a single link, but it's just the same pattern.

SonOfLilit 6y ago

The most accurate answer would be "HN started as a community of fans of Paul Graham's essays, and this is the syntax he uses in his essays, so this style was imported to HN and thrives to this day".

maccard 6y ago
It's also the standard format for non-pg essays, and published content. And, as hyperlinks aren't available in HN comments, this is the least disruptive way to insert text.
- SonOfLilit 6y ago
  Specifically [1]-style footnotes weren't popular in the early days of HN, but everyone on HN used them. I guess today I see them a lot more all over the web. [1] footnote

war1025 6y ago

I do it because it's the easiest way to link to something without ruining the flow of the text.

skocznymroczny 6y ago

I feel like often people do it to make their comment look smarter, as if your every reply is a miniature academic paper.

andrewzah 6y ago
I suppose charitable interpretations are just not an option, then? Long links in the middle of sentences or paragraphs are annoying. Since HN doesn't allow hyperlinking, having a list of links at the bottom is the least disruptive option.

ponker 6y ago

Inline raw links are annoying to read because either the link is properly constructed and just repeats the text leading up to it, or is a horrible mess of tracking GUIDs. Since most people aren’t going to click the link it serves more people to get the link out of the way.

MereInterest 6y ago

As I'm writing a comment, I don't know how many links I will include. If I need to go back and edit it for the special case of N=1, that is additional effort.

young_unixer 6y ago

Even when it's just one link, it looks better as a reference than a random URL floating around in the text (or after it).

_Microft 6y ago

I do not like the cluttered look of links interspersed throughout the text and it is not even clear that they provide value for most of the readers. This is why I prefer to collect them at the end, one per line for those who actually want to look them up.