Notes created with a larger reference range than expected

Reply

Graham Criddle | Forum Activity | Posted: Tue, Jan 7 2014 2:37 AM

The screenshot below shows what happens if I try and create a "note by reference" for the first 11 verses of Philiippians 1 (this is with 5.2a B1 on Windows 8.1)

As you can see it uses the entire chapter as its range instead of the selected range.

If I start the selection from verse 1b - "to all God's people..." then the range is created correctly.

I wondered if this was related to smart selection in some way - but the same behaviour happens if I select the text using the Ctrl key or turn smart selection off

Can anyone reproduce this?

Thanks, Graham 

Reply

Graham Criddle | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Jan 7 2014 8:37 AM

Tonya J Ross:

Graham Criddle:

Can anyone reproduce this?

I am able to reproduce this issue in both the NIV1984 and NIV2011, and will report it to Development. 

Thanks Tonya

I hadn't thought that it might be NIV-specific but just checked in ESV and it works fine.

Graham

Reply

Graham Criddle | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jan 13 2014 11:05 AM

Hi Tonya

Thanks for checking and getting back to me.

Tonya J Ross:

This has been determined 'by design'.

I will admit it seems like a very strange design to me.

Tonya J Ross:

There is a milestone for 'Philippians 1' immediately preceding verse 1.

But there doesn't seem to be one at the beginning of Philippians 2

Tonya J Ross:

 If you start your selection at 'Paul and Timothy' (omitting the 1) you can get the range for Philippians 1:1-11

True - but it seems strange that I need to.

Graham

Reply

Tim Hensler | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Jan 14 2014 8:06 AM

I too have frustrating experiences with Smart Selection - I have to use the ALT key too often to select the text I want.  I like the concept in general, but it often hinders rather than helps the user.  I've also received the "by design" answer when struggling with Smart Selection.  (http://community.logos.com/forums/p/77257/541597.aspx#541597) I think the "design" needs to be reviewed.