Faulty numbering in cross-reference to footnote

[eighty2]

Version: 7.6.4.1 (X86_64) / LibreOffice Community
Build ID: 60(Build:1)
CPU threads: 2; OS: Linux 6.1; UI render: default; VCL: gtk3
Locale: en-US (en_US.utf8); UI: en-US
7.6.4-1
Calc: threaded

.odt document

One cell in table is linked to footnote which is - as of time being - placed on same page as the table. Footnote got the number “1”, the reference to it in table cell accordently. It means also it is this cell content for which the foot note was created.
Text body paragraph on next page has also cross-reference to same footnote. This is the spot where problems arise

• second reference to footnote (the cross-reference) gets the number 2 in reference mark - is this a behavior expected by Writer developers? Please note that there exists - as of time being - no footnote numbered 2.
  Q.1: Why does it work this way. Any means exist to fix it?
• by doing a click on reference mark of the second cross-reference the user doesn’t navigate to footnote 1 on preceding page. In contrary to this a click on reference mark in table cell redirects page view to footnote.
• reference mark of second cross reference has same character formatting as style of text body paragraph - it means superscript is not used while author expects automatic application of superscript attribute to cross-reference mark.

Well, I understand footnote anchor and cross-reference are two different things, this may be the reason of Writer behavior third bullet.
Q.2: Is document author expected to change on itself character formatting of cross-reference pointing to existing footnote?

[ajlittoz]

Attach a sample file.

Cross-references just retrieve some data about the “source”. You can use this data any way you like but it is your responsibility to format it. You can reference an existing footnote “id”, but to make it look like a footnote callout, you must apply the usual character styles. This answers Q2.

Waiting for your sample file to answer Q1. User error very likely.

[eighty2]

@ajlittoz

Waiting for your sample file to answer Q1. User error very likely

Document duplicate which has been anonymized doesn’t present problem Q.1 any more. However, I observe at this occasion same effect as in case of Giant part of page unintentionally blank because of table - #4 by eighty2
It means, a number of hours later, when document was open again to continue writing - the problem is no more present. On another side the click on cross-reference mark in text (not the footnote anchor) still doesn’t trigger the view change to footnote - actually a problem not higher than minor. Major problem no more present. No idea how it happened.