Bug: 4.0c Beta 2: Words with letter footnote reference marks after them get included in wordlist wit
I started searching for righteousness and noticed a bunch of weird terms in the auto-complete dropdown menu, after the expected ones (note this list I've already scrolled past the first three which I deemed OK; righteousnesse is likely an older English spelling):
I'm going through looking at these to see where they come from. Some are typos (which I'm reporting as such), but two of these (Righteousnessa and Righteousnessb) come from these occurrences:
The footnote reference markers are included with the word in the index. That is erroneous. It also means I could not find these occurrences if I were looking for just righteousness.
Comments
-
aaargh. To quote Lady Macbeth "Out, Out, d... Bug!" This is on the sloppy side.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
Plenty material for a typo report - my library doesn't have such diversity[:)]
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
Dave Hooton said:
Plenty material for a typo report - my library doesn't have such diversity
Yup, I've been reporting lots of typos. And when I report one, I mark it with a custom highlighting style I've created just for the purpose, so I can remember I've already reported it (and check up on the typos I've reported to see when they get fixed, which is now possible thanks to Logos having implemented search for highlighting -- yay!).
0 -
Rosie Perera said:
Yup, I've been reporting lots of typos. And when I report one, I mark it with a custom highlighting style I've created just for the purpose, so I can remember I've already reported it (and check up on the typos I've reported to see when they get fixed, which is now possible thanks to Logos having implemented search for highlighting -- yay!).
Rosie, I really like the ability to search for custom highlighting, but how do you search for all occurrences where this type of highlighting has been applied (e.g. all typos that you have marked with this style)? If you put "typo:" in the search field, do they show up in the search results? It doesn't work for me. I tried a wild card symbol (*) with the custom highlighting, but that did not seem to work (or else I didn't have the patience to wait it out.
0 -
Ken Guenther said:
Rosie, I really like the ability to search for custom highlighting, but how do you search for all occurrences where this type of highlighting has been applied (e.g. all typos that you have marked with this style)? If you put "typo:" in the search field, do they show up in the search results? It doesn't work for me. I tried a wild card symbol (*) with the custom highlighting, but that did not seem to work (or else I didn't have the patience to wait it out.
No, you can't search for "typo" and find these, as it's part of the highlighting style (the "before" label text) not part of the surface text.
I used a wildcard with the custom highlighting. Yes, it took over an hour to search my entire library the first time I tried it (which I haven't gotten around to reporting as a performance bug, but I plan to) but at least it did come back with all the proper hits once it finished.
0 -
Rosie are you talking about searching for * inside a custom style? I tried that, see my images below, IMHO it doesn't work so good yet.
Problems:
1. I had 3 custom styles in 1 book of the Pulpit Commentary, on a pretty fast machine. It took 546 seconds, or 9 minutes!) to search it! This is the performance problem you refer to? See images below to see my search, is this correct?
2. Note that the word "Warning" is in the wrong font style in the text, vs. the style definition.
3. It came up with 22 results? What is that? It's 3 occurrences. It's not letters, there are more than that (you can see the three highlighted areas. Anyone know what the 22 results are?
0 -
Well, I see you've discovered my other thread where I reported the performance on this type of search as unacceptable. It took over 20 minutes in my entire library which is bad enough. For it to take 9 minutes in a single resource is outrageous.
I haven't counted to see if the number of hits reported is accurate. I'll run the search again and do that.
It seems to me that the problem of the "Warning!" text showing up in the wrong font has nothing to do with Searching, though. If you open the resource where you did the highlighting without having done a search for it, don't you see the same behavior?
What font did you select for the word "Warning"? I tried to recreate your highlight style:
Note that I left the font for the "Above" label text set to "Default" (which I'm guessing is what you did too).
In the Preview box, the word "Warning!" is in a sans-serif font, but that is slightly deceptive, as it's not how it will look in a resource window. I think it's because that happens to be the default UI font (for text in tool panels). But in the resource text itself, "Warning!" shows up in the default resource text font, which is a serif font. If you set the Above label to any other font besides Default, it will show that font in both the Preview window and in the resource text. Perhaps the Preview window should use the default resource font when the font is set to Default, rather than the default UI font. [Note: I've been playing around with editing the font for the label text of this style, and sometimes the Preview window updates correctly as soon as I change it; sometimes it doesn't until I click OK; and sometimes it doesn't even after I click OK; so there's definitely a bug in here, but it needs to be better explained, and it needs to be in its own thread. I'll work on that.]
0 -
Rosie Perera said:
[Note: I've been playing around with editing the font for the label text of this style, and sometimes the Preview window updates correctly as soon as I change it; sometimes it doesn't until I click OK; and sometimes it doesn't even after I click OK; so there's definitely a bug in here, but it needs to be better explained, and it needs to be in its own thread. I'll work on that.]
I've reported this bug: http://community.logos.com/forums/t/14936.aspx
0
