I can't set a reading plan for the whole book. Seems like any plan I try to create excludes Tertullian and Origen. (Keep out the heretics, huh?!)
I don't have that specific resource so I can't test it. Are you seeing this behavior in any other resources?
This is a long standing problem with how reading plans are created. It's caused by the fact that the reading plan generator only uses the very first referencing scheme in the resource for generating readings. The first referencing scheme in some resources doesn't actually cover the entire book.
The best I can offer at this point is to manually create a custom reading plan.
I often wondered how this worked and why some books would not create plans but this explains it. Could the software for generating reading plans be adjusted at some point to check to see if there may be multiple schemes within a resource?
Could the software for generating reading plans be adjusted at some point to check to see if there may be multiple schemes within a resource?
Almost anything can be done. The question on any feature or bug is more a matter of priorities, and the importance/urgency of an issue compared to how much effort or risk is involved in implementing it.
Judging from how long this has been a problem, I wouldn't hold your breath on it. It is however something that we are aware of, and would like to fix at some point.
Reading Plans generally need to be rewritten from the ground up (and probably merged with Courses). Smarter boundaries and dateless plans are the most important missing features, IMO. I'd use Reading Plans very regularly if they had these two features.
Judging from how long this has been a problem, I wouldn't hold your breath on it. It is however something that we are aware of, and would like to fix at some point. Reading Plans generally need to be rewritten from the ground up (and probably merged with Courses). Smarter boundaries and dateless plans are the most important missing features, IMO. I'd use Reading Plans very regularly if they had these two features.
I echo the need for dateless plans. Sometimes I want a plan to keep me on track with reading a book but sometimes I don't necessarily want to read that book straight through day after day. This allows me to be on a track but not have a date attached to it.
Judging from how long this has been a problem, I wouldn't hold your breath on it. It is however something that we are aware of, and would like to fix at some point. Reading Plans generally need to be rewritten from the ground up (and probably merged with Courses). Smarter boundaries and dateless plans are the most important missing features, IMO. I'd use Reading Plans very regularly if they had these two features. I echo the need for dateless plans. Sometimes I want a plan to keep me on track with reading a book but sometimes I don't necessarily want to read that book straight through day after day. This allows me to be on a track but not have a date attached to it.
I totally agree with what is being said here.
I echo the need for dateless plans.
In some cases, Reading Lists can serve this function.
I echo the need for dateless plans. In some cases, Reading Lists can serve this function.
You know I have honestly never looked at/used the Reading List feature.
I echo the need for dateless plans. In some cases, Reading Lists can serve this function. You know I have honestly never looked at/used the Reading List feature.
MJ is a master at using reading lists but somehow they have never taken root with me.
I haven't experienced this problem elsewhere.
Smarter boundaries and dateless plans are the most important missing features, IMO. I'd use Reading Plans very regularly if they had these two features.
Yes. Except for Bibles, I mostly ignore the boundaries in my reading plans (always auto-generated; I don't have the patience to manually create custom ones). I mostly use them to stay on track with the goal of completing a book by a particular date.
