BUG with indenting text in RC3 Notes

Mark is spot on with that answer. It's a typographical refinement. If you look closely, you may find f-I ligatures and other typographical niceties in your Logos.

It may or may not be a bug, even if you prefer it as it was. Some people may consider it an enhancement.

Don Awalt said:

I had a long answer in reply, but I deleted it - it's a bug - it changed. If it's a new feature, then to add that without giving me a way to match format that we have had for 3+ years is deplorable. I guess you could call anything a feature that's not a crash or data corruption?

Don Awalt said:

Why the starred users consider this a "feature" and other changes in behavior bugs is beyond me.

By definition, a bug is something that is not working as intended. Without knowing whether the change was intentional or not, we don't know whether it's a bug, which is why I said "it may not may not be a bug". If it's unintentional, or has other intended consequences, or it doesn't work consistently then it is a bug. If a programmer has spent hours improving the notes editor to specifically add hanging punctuation, then it's a feature. I've made no judgement either way in this thread, and I still don't. I simply said that "it may not be a bug" and in other applications it's considered a feature.

fgh said:

That's definitely a bug, as is this:

Agreed [:)].

Don Awalt said:

Would it be so hard to have just left the thread as a posting of a behavior that has changed, confirm it does the same thing from other users, and let Logos decide? To cloud the thread with all of this other stuff is terribly deflating and takes away all incentive to participate or report here.

I'm sorry if you feel I've removed any incentive to post. That's certainly not my intention. Sometimes I forget that people use the forums for different reasons - some use them to interact with other users, and some use them to publicly draw things to Logos' attention, and many people for both purposes. I am usually in "interact with other users" mode, and therefore thought it would be helpful to interact. Because I have a background in computer programming, I may also have a stricter definition of exactly what is a bug than perhaps other do.

But I believe that interaction is often very useful because sometimes what appear to be bugs are actually misunderstood features (here's an example of when that happened to me), and sometimes bugs are more complex than we realise and it takes the community to work out exactly what the root of the problem is (here's an example of that, following on from this). That collaboration helps all of us, because it means together we can be more specific about the nature of the bug when it's communicated to Logos engineers. Even in this thread, the discussion has helped brought to the surface more bugs that can hopefully now be fixed, and that may not have happened if we had just confirmed the initial report.

My interaction, therefore, was designed to help clarify exactly what the problem was, and therefore to encourage forum participation. I'm sorry if it didn't come across that way.

Thanks, Bradley.

Bradley Grainger (Logos) said:

We can consider having an (internal) option by which this can be disabled for Notes display, but still kept for resource display.

That would be nice, but I wouldn't personally consider it in any way urgent.

Do you agree Dave's and my issues are bugs?

Alan Palmer (Logos) said:

Jack Caviness said:

fgh said:

The first one insists on indenting two steps, even though I only click the button once. (Most other screenshots in this thread also seem to show a double indent, though I'm guessing you too only clicked once?)

Noticed that the text move more than I would have expected, but did not think that it moved two indents until you pointed it out. This is definitely a bug that needs to be fixed.

I was unable to reproduce this on my first try. Can you provide more details?

FYI: We did adjust the amount of paragraph margin added by the "increase indent" in a previous RC (this was done in conjunction with the fix for list item indicators drawing over the paragraph content). Perhaps you're comparing indents applied before and after this change?

Just for the full context, here's fgh's report with the screenshot. I had to go scrolling back quite a bit through the thread to find it, so it would be easier for others reading this thread if it were copied forward here:

fgh said:

The first one insists on indenting two steps, even though I only click the button once.

fgh, Alan says he couldn't reproduce it. Perhaps you could give exact repro steps: e.g., did you indent the second paragraph first and then go up to the first one to click once and it indented twice? Or something else? I can't repro at all either, but I'm on Windows and this appears to be a Mac-only issue. Or else I'm not guessing the proper order of what you did -- typing, copying, pasting, clicking, etc. When was the note created originally? It looks like you must have typed that verse in initially rather than pasting because it doesn't appear like that ("for just as the body is one has many members" missing the word "and" between "one" and "has") in any Bibles. But then you probably copied and pasted to duplicate it. Did you paste above or below? Where in the paragraph did you click before clicking the indent button? Etc. Those kinds of details might be necessary to attempt reproduction.

fgh said:

I just pasted it, selected it, and clicked indent. Then pasted it once more, selected that, and clicked indent again. And found that the first was indented one step more than the second.

Is it possible that you had more than just part of the second paragraph selected when you clicked indent the second time? If your selection spanned even onto just the paragraph mark at the end of the first paragraph (without even including any of the text), as in the screenshot below, then clicking indent would indeed indent both of them another tab stop which would lead to the result you saw.