This is an addendum to my own question above.
I've discovered that the "red carets" at the beginning of the Unconditional Text of my endnotes are called "Hidden Conditional Text Markers" (see image.)
I find it odd that these carets have two dots over them when indicating non-existent conditional text at beginning but only one dot when indicating real, hidden conditional text at the end.
I can delete these phantom indicators at the beginning, but when I do, my cross-reference linkage breaks. When I restore the linkage, the front-end Hidden Conditional Text Markers come back.
I'm not sure this anomaly is causing the problem described above. But I'd like to cure it and see if it has any ameliorating effect.
Message was edited by: hezekiah-1812
This is my second addendum to my original query above of 8 May.
I discovered I could eliminate the the phantom carets (noted in addendum one) at the beginning of some endnotes by simply changing the conditionals to a different character style.
I could also get the colon-like blue dots to appear before most of my 127 endnotes (see they are missing from 31 and 32 above) by copying a lead letter from another endnote and pasting them before the few without them. Then I just eliminated the copied letter and blue colon-like dots stayed.
None of this helped, however, with the occasional failure to cross-reference correctly when creating a hyperlinked PDF. (I've made the PDFs with both the conditionals and invisibles off.)
I also tried eliminating the conditional text altogether and also tried indenting the text on master pages for the copy and the endnotes by a quarter-inch top and bottom and centering (because some that failed were at the very top of a page.)
Is there a bug in the program? Can anyone help, even with a suggestion as to where else I might ask? I'm running out of ideas -- and time; I have spent hours and hours on this problem and I need to get the project done. Thanks.
This is my third addendum.
I finally figured out a solution to this. On the 10 or so that failed of the 127 total. I was able to correct the problem on the failures by breaking the link and letting the cross-reference button re-establish the link, with the cursor at the point where the superscript number would go — and then let the x-ref protocol assign the number there, rather than typing it in myself.
Why this worked, I do not know. Why I didn't have to do that with the other 120 or so that succeeded, I do not know. Why I never got a failure-alert on those destined to fail, I do not know.
Since I solved this myself, do I get 10 points?