What are your thoughts ?
How inconsiderate[:D]
If a delete a note that is attached to a highlight, the highlight remains in the resource, now with no note attached.
An orphan Highlight, like we have currently? I would like to have an option "don't use my Highlights for collaboration/sharing" ==> http://community.logos.com/forums/p/33734/253171.aspx#253171
I would like to have an option "don't use my Highlights for collaboration/sharing"
I agree and saying select the option 'dont' use internet' does not cut it as a solution. One size does not fit all.
I would be surprised if this wasn't an option. I would also expect that deleting a highlighting note or the highlight itself would always remove both.
I agree and saying select the option 'dont' use internet' does not cut it as a solution.
Logos has consistently told us that we would be able to create work groups, keep things private or make them public (how public I don't recall them saying - I assumed "all Logos users" was the outer limit of public.)
If I erase a highlight within the resource, the attached note is also deleted What are your thoughts ?
This is a killer for me, they need to add logic to say if there is content DO NOT delete note, if not I have no problem with auto deleting it if its empty, but object to it thinking my notes are no longer required.
One can look at this two ways - either of which could be argued as the more "proper" user view:
1 Notes and Highlights differ only in that Notes have Logos defined markers in the text while Highlights may have Logos or user defined markers. Following this thought leads one to have both or neither marking/note.
2.Note marking and Highlight marking differ only in the Note requiring associated text and Highlighting only permitting associated text. Following this thought leads to the ability to delete a highlight note without deleting the highlighting.
I prefer the first method because I would like to see the highlighting note automatically built with the palette and style name. This would result in notes being the generic item and highlights being a specific item i.e. using Logos defaults I would expect to have my notes in a very specific classification. Whereas if I used a personal palette I would expect it to be tightly classified e.g. Berlin's parallelism type or the gender, number and case of Greek nouns.
I think this would be the easiest pattern of system behavior. We wouldn't get the appearance, after the fact, of unpredictable behavior - the "why, I didn't delete it" syndrome, the Logos 4 did this to me syndrome. I wouldn't object to a hidden note - then when I heard the I didn't do it routine, I could point them to the hidden feature (sound familiar? something like the I didn't hide the book?) Preferable to hiding to me would be to optionally sort all blank notes to the end.
anything with custom/user inputted text should never autodelete, thats my 2c and we may just have to agree to disagree
I think it is bad practice and will lead to more issues in future, better "why didnt it delete.?" questions than "where has it gone.?"
It is my experience that orphans create more problems than auto-deletes. Unfortunately, I no longer have the luxury of a lab to watch user behavior. Well, to be honest, I only had that luxury once - implementing the first administrative web app.
yes but removing the highlighting from the "NEW FORMAT" note, should not delete any user note content, there is no orphan being created, the link should still there to the reference, the only thing that should be removed is the highight portion of the record, and not the whole record as it is currently doing..
What you want to see is a function that converts a highlight note to a standard note i.e. removing the highlight would do one of 3 things:
I'd prefer to see this as a specific convert function rather than a delete.
MJ - I think you may sitll have a mind set of these two things being different as in 4.3, in 4.3 there were 2 distinct records in the table, in 4.5 there is now 1 combined record containing both these features, there is no convert possible, as we only are working on one record, this is why the auto delete is such a bad idea..
Sorry if I sound like a broken record, but suppose you highlighted a phrase, went away came back in a few days and added your notes to the phrase and then changed it to say "Icon - no marker", and maybe a month later came back to the passage again (lets suppose you had chosen the no marker option) and said oh I dont want the highight and erase them, you would not expect to lose your notes, at least I hope not... but that is what is currently happening
MJ - I think you may sitll have a mind set of these two things being different as in 4.3, in 4.3 there were 2 distinct records in the table, in 4.5 there is now 1 combined record containing both these features, there is no convert possible, as we only are working on one record, this is why the auto delete is such a bad idea.. Sorry if I sound like a broken record, but suppose you highlighted a phrase, went away came back in a few days and added your notes to the phrase and then changed it to say "Icon - no marker", and maybe a month later came back to the passage again (lets suppose you had chosen the no marker option) and said oh I dont want the highight and erase them, you would not expect to lose your notes, at least I hope not... but that is what is currently happening
If I have a note with a highlight.........
....I can easily remove the highlight without deleting the text from the note icon drop down (seems to be what the erase function does).....and of course add back the same or different highlight at a later point is I so choose
the only thing I can't do is 'convert' what the annotation is connected to i.e. selection or verse.....but for my work flows I would very rarely want to do that....
selecting the section in the resource, and clicking erase in the highlighting window is what's causing the issue.. yes you can do it the way you say but I suspect the erase on the highlighting tab is what most users would expect to do to remove the highlight.. as its how it was in 4.3.
Not sure I've thought through it, but intuitively this seems spot on.
LIKE.
[Y] +1
I am noticing something now... If I have a note open and apply highlighting to text in a resource. A new note is being added to my note for each highlight that I am doing. So I have lots of new notes under one note file (and they do not belong there). I only wanted to highlight my text...not add a note.
In searching this out further, I see that if I have no note files open, it adds the annotation to the last note file I had open or if I have several currently open it is adding it to the one I last used. It shows that it is doing this by a box at the bottom of the highlights panel. Another thing...if I use more than one type of highlighting on the same word... say ALL CAPS and Bold Text it posts two annotations (one for each one).
So it now appears that we cannot highlight a resource without an annotation being added somewhere.
If this remains this way, I will have to create a note file for every book that I highlight in. Great if you want to review all of your highlights in a note file (or print them all out), but this is going to require making sure I have the appropriate note file open that I want the highlight added to. Making a new workflow necessary. Then there is the question about all the existing highlighting that is in effect left out of this new way of doing things. Just wondering how this is all going to work out.
I can see some advantages, but it will really take some getting use to. So do I start now...anticipating that this is the way it will remain?
Another thing I am noticing...Having added a test note to a Bible text that also had highlighting, then going to the text to erase the highlighting deletes everything. BUT if I open the annotations file that contains the highlighting and delete them individually the note in my note file that I want to retain then remains.
Problem here is locating the note file that holds the highlights and then there is NO way to tell which highlight style you are erasing... since it had one for BOLD, one for CAPS, and one for yellow highlighting. You cannot tell which is which until you delete them. If I delete my note file that has my test notes, all the highlighting is erased, as well as their annotations in the "Testing File for Highlighting" for each of the highlights.
This current method really needs some work.If it is going to remain this way, the highlighting annotations must show which file they can be located in, so they can be deleted individually from there. The annotations for each type of highlight should be represented in the annotations file so that we can select which highlight we are wanting erased (maybe one annotations box with the different layers?).
EDIT: Left clicking on the highlighted area now no longer brings up the "erase highlighting" option...it is now Remove annotations.I am really uncomfortable with the idea that I could loose my notes with a wrong click!
