I'm finding in 4.1 beta 1 that the links in several sections of the guides aren't working properly in that they open up the relevant book to page 1 rather than to the particular passage or topic you're interested in; it seems to be happening in Collections, Grammars and Visualisations, Commentaries still work as expected. See attached screenshot where hovering over the link to Porter shows the link is going to the book's front-matter rather than the relevant article.
I'm amazed how easily these things happen, not just that we have to perform regression testing. It has been acknowledged by Melissa, though, as the link is in the resource title rather than the article. It also happens in Topics.
Dave===
Windows 10 & Android 8
Same here.
Lynden Williams Communications https://www.lyndenwilliams.net
Dave Hooton: I'm amazed how easily these things happen, not just that we have to perform regression testing.
I'm amazed how easily these things happen, not just that we have to perform regression testing.
These sorts of things wouldn't happen if there were a regular suite of tests (including regression testing of all prior fixed bugs, and automated as much as possible) that were performed without fail before every new release. Mind you, this isn't a regression (at least by the definition I've been accustomed to, which means something broken again that had been broken before and then fixed). I don't recall this bug ever being there before. I think this is a newly introduced bug. But still, it's the kind of thing that could be tested in an automated way given the right tools.
How to Ask for Help | Logos Wiki | My Machine Specs | My Blog
It's backwards - click on the article name and you get the book title, click on the book title and you get the article. Not right, but that's how it behaves in 4.1B1.
Yup, it threw me for a loop the other day when I hit the same thing.
Sarcasm is my love language. Obviously I love you.
Tim Hensler: It's backwards - click on the article name and you get the book title, click on the book title and you get the article. Not right, but that's how it behaves in 4.1B1.
Thanks for sharing this observation. I hadn't tried clicking the resource title so I didn't realize it would take me where I wanted to go.
This bug will be fixed in Beta 2.
Rosie Perera:Mind you, this isn't a regression (at least by the definition I've been accustomed to
It's not a regression but Regression Testing would ensure that existing functionality has not been affected by new code or bug fixes (because testing assumes the presence of bugs regression testing ensures that previously tested functionality does not regress!).