Bug: 4.3 Beta 7: PBB: Hover over link yields duplicate popup
Create a link using the following syntax:
[[Bible:Ge 25:8]]
Compile the PBB and then hover over that link in the resulting book. The popup is duplicated.
Here's the source document in Word:
Here's the resulting book, with mouse hovering over that link:
Notice the popup has the link duplicated.
A question while I'm at it: how come no popup preview of the Bible text at that location comes up in a PBB Cross-Reference Index? It works in the New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge. Do I need to put some sort of tag in to get this to work? Is it even supported? Or is this a bug?
Comments
-
The second problem is caused by a bug which creates both an internal resource link and a datatype link. The lack of a popup is a side-effect of this bug. It's documented in the Wiki as:
The compiler does not handle datatype links correctly (see below for
terminology). When specifying a datatype link, the compiler creates both a datatype link to any resource, and
an ordinary link to the current resource. This is correct only if the
current resource has a location that matches the datatype. If it does
not have that location, the compiler should not add the ordinary link
because doing so prevents the datatype link working. The work around is
that instead of clicking on the link, you can right-click on it, select
the datatype and choose ‘open’.It's likely the first problem is caused by the same bug, although possibly that only happens when certain document types are used, or when documents have Bible milestones.
As a side note, really your tags are incorrect based on what I think you're trying to achieve. That's probably not helping:
[[Bible:Ge 25:8]] should read [[Ge 25:8|Bible: Gen 25:8]]
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
Mark Barnes said:
I thought, based on my reading of the wiki page, that the label was optional and only required when the text you want to display is different from the link. So if I'd wanted it to read "v. 8" for example, in a passage where I was talking about Genesis 25, I'd need to put in the label. Are you now telling me that the label is required all the time? If so, then the wiki page is misleading.
0 -
Rosie Perera said:
I thought, based on my reading of the wiki page, that the label was optional and only required when the text you want to display is different from the link. So if I'd wanted it to read "v. 8" for example, in a passage where I was talking about Genesis 25, I'd need to put in the label. Are you now telling me that the label is required all the time? If so, then the wiki page is misleading.
No, but:
- based on the screenshots above, your input text was Ge 25:8, but your output text was Gen 25:8 hence my assumption of you needing a label.
- If you just want the text to remain the same, you don't need a tag anyway. It should just be automatically interpreted.
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
Mark Barnes said:
That was Logos's fault. I would have been happy with Ge 25:8 as the output text, but it converted it to Gen 25:8. I was happy with that too, so I left it without a label. I wouldn't want to put in what I'd consider to be unnecessary redundancy. It makes more work for me.
0 -
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
Rosie Perera said:Mark Barnes said:
That was Logos's fault. I would have been happy with Ge 25:8 as the output text, but it converted it to Gen 25:8. I was happy with that too, so I left it without a label. I wouldn't want to put in what I'd consider to be unnecessary redundancy. It makes more work for me.
It shouldn't duplicate the reference in the popup; I'll submit that report. Since PB tool auto detects Bible references, though, could you forego the field tagging, and just type it as 'Ge 25:8'? That way it will remain as typed (and won't be duplicated).
0 -
Melissa Snyder said:
It shouldn't duplicate the reference in the popup; I'll submit that report. Since PB tool auto detects Bible references, though, could you forego the field tagging, and just type it as 'Ge 25:8'? That way it will remain as typed (and won't be duplicated).
Sure, I can do that. So what you're saying is there is (and is going to be) no support for the syntax of [[Bible:Ge 25:8]] without the label? If so, then the wiki needs to be corrected. It does seem to be pointless if the PB tool auto detects Bible references, so I would not be sad to see it go. Just want to make sure we have the documentation correct.
0 -
Rosie Perera said:
So what you're saying is there is (and is going to be) no support for the syntax of [[Bible:Ge 25:8]] without the label?
I don't think Melissa is saying that. She's saying that there's nothing to be gained by using that syntax because it doesn't give you anything that Ge 25:8 on it's own doesn't give you (except an 'n', of course!). As the wiki already says
- [[Bible:jn 3:16]] - most Bible links are created automatically, which means you don’t need to tag them
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
Mark Barnes said:Rosie Perera said:
So what you're saying is there is (and is going to be) no support for the syntax of [[Bible:Ge 25:8]] without the label?
I don't think Melissa is saying that. She's saying that there's nothing to be gained by using that syntax because it doesn't give you anything that Ge 25:8 on it's own doesn't give you (except an 'n', of course!). As the wiki already says
- [[Bible:jn 3:16]] - most Bible links are created automatically, which means you don’t need to tag them
OK, but she's suggesting I not use the tag rather than passing on to development that using the tag messes with the way I put the abbreviation, which you said was a bug. If the tag is going to be supported, that little bug should probably be fixed.
0 -
Rosie Perera said:
OK, but she's suggesting I not use the tag rather than passing on to development that using the tag messes with the way I put the abbreviation, which you said was a bug. If the tag is going to be supported, that little bug should probably be fixed.
Actually, I didn't include (or imply, I don't think) in my suggestion that I wouldn't be passing on to development the issue with 'Ge' being changed to 'Gen'. The bug report I filed yesterday on the duplication of the reference in the hover popup included a question as to why that might be happening.
0
