figure references in brackets

[tolot27]

If I put a figure reference in rounded brackets, it gets not renderend. I have to escape the opening bracket.

I know I can change the general templates but for particular exceptions it should work the other way. Here is an example:

---
hyperrefoptions: pagebackref=true,linktoc=all
colorlinks: true
linkReferences: True
nameInLink: True
cref: True
...

# Figures

![Figure caption](image.png){#fig:figureRef}

A figure reference to a "normal" figure with `@fig:figureRef` results in (@fig:figureRef).

# Subfigures

<div id="fig:figureRef">
![subfigure 1 caption](image1.png){#fig:figureRefA}

![subfigure 2 caption](image2.png){#fig:figureRefB}

Caption of figure
</div>

References to subfigures will be rendered as figureNumber (subfigureNumber), e.g., in this particular example, `[@fig:figureRefA]` will produce [@fig:figureRefA] but `(@fig:figureRefA)` will produce (@fig:figureRefA). A workaround is to escape the open bracket `\([@fig:figureRefA])`, which results in the correct \([@fig:figureRefA]).

## Pandoc figure referencing

![Alt text of pandoc figure](image){#image}

And its reference using pandoc syntax `([image](#image))`: ([image](#image)).

[lierdakil]

Escaping the opening parenthesis does nothing, the primary difference is coming from the fact that you've put @fig:... part inside brackets there.

This issue is frankly in the wrong place. Pandoc-crossref (ab)uses citation syntax for references, and in this particular case, pandoc fails to parse (@fig:...) as a citation. My working theory is that it happens because of the intersection with example list syntax, but that's mostly a guess.

Workaround: use a slightly more awkward syntax of ([@fig:...]). You could also complain on the pandoc repo if you want.

[lierdakil]

Nevermind, it's actually a pretty annoying bug, so I'll create the upstream issue myself.

[lierdakil]

Fixed upstream