[SUGGESTION:4432] [B42] Compile to Ms Word errors

User avatar
jje
Posts: 339
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 5:57 pm
Platform: Windows
Location: Sussex, UK

Mon Mar 16, 2020 6:31 pm Post

First time I've compiled anything for a long while (but I finished my fourth chapter!).

A couple of problems:

  • Footnotes are rendered as hyperlinks (in blue and underlined), which looks awful. Not too hard to fix, but it would be nice to have an option to format them as ordinary text.
  • Even though I have UK English (a.k.a. "proper English" :D ) as my default dictionary in both Scrivener and Word, Scrivener insists on changing the language to US English :(
  • The inspector footnotes in Scrivener are formatted in a Segoe UI in Word; again, not hard to fix with search and replace, but it would be nice to be able to define a footnote style in Scrivener so the footnotes appear in a font of your choice in the Word version.

User avatar
tiho_d
Posts: 1200
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2011 1:14 pm
Platform: Linux + Windows

Mon Mar 16, 2020 11:48 pm Post

1) Check RTF Compatibilty "Ensure hyperlinks are colored and underlined"
2) Not sure what you mean by that.
3) Check the compile format "Footnotes & Comments" > Override font.

bi
biblioman
Posts: 104
Joined: Sat May 26, 2018 11:08 pm
Platform: Windows

Tue Mar 17, 2020 5:38 pm Post

jje wrote:The inspector footnotes in Scrivener are formatted in a Segoe UI in Word; again, not hard to fix with search and replace, but it would be nice to be able to define a footnote style in Scrivener so the footnotes appear in a font of your choice in the Word version.

tiho_d wrote:3) Check the compile format "Footnotes & Comments" > Override font.


It is more than true that «it would be nice to be able to define a footnote style in Scrivener so the footnotes appear in a font of your choice in the Word version.» Even though it is not only for fonts choice, but a lot of other paragraph formatting parameters that could have been changed in a couple of mouse clicks for all the dozens of footnotes in my document, but they couldn't. Yes, it is extremely important option still missing.

What is much more disappointing for me, even unbelievable, is the fact that the developers have not seen still that exporting footnotes without any special style attached to them is essential conceptual error. If you understand that a quotation paragraph needs special style, how can you not understand that a footnote paragraph does need its own style too—just as a special type of paragraph, special type of contents? In this perspective, we are not speaking about an option, but rather about an important error to be finally addressed.

I did not plan to mention this again before the release, but it was really sad to see this senseless advice concerning «Override font» option.

User avatar
tiho_d
Posts: 1200
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2011 1:14 pm
Platform: Linux + Windows

Tue Mar 17, 2020 10:20 pm Post

The "senseless advice" about the override font option is a working advice in the current state, to the problem of changing the font family of Inspector footnotes. I can always give "nice to have" advices which will not help. Which one do you prefer?

User avatar
narrsd
Posts: 716
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 8:34 pm
Platform: Win + iOS

Tue Mar 17, 2020 11:34 pm Post

@tiho_d, I'd certainly agree that over-excited posts aren't clever or useful.

I have though just tried this out - as a chance to learn a facet not yet used of Compiiles, but it doesn't seem to work, so may deserve a bug listing.

It's a little hard to discover, but then with the Gear at bottom left, Edit Format, setting Override Font for Footnotes and Comments, I try other fonts and sizes.

But I still get 'the same' font for Footnotes in a Word or PDF compile: Sitka 10 in my case. Size changes don't over-ride either.

Sitka 10, for whatever reason, is actually the font you see by selecting in the Inspector Footnote itself, which seems odd, as Sitka isn't a standard font though I have it.

This is all in Beta 42, from a fresh deinstall-install. So it looks that the font is getting hard-coded, or otherwise mis-set, somewhere, and not obeying the override.

Unless of course I've missed something important about all this, always possible....

As far as the idea of a settible 'different font' for Footnotes, that's sensible, isn't it, something Formats would use unless it is specifically over-ridden. So, a feature? I actually went looking for this in File | Options, but didn't find anything -- actually hoping to find out where that Sitka 10 had been set...

User avatar
tiho_d
Posts: 1200
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2011 1:14 pm
Platform: Linux + Windows

Tue Mar 17, 2020 11:57 pm Post

@narrsd: Just tested this one more time, and the Inspector Footnotes when compiled to PDF and DOCX do get the specified overridden font and sizes. If you have a case which fails, please upload your demo project and I will have a look at it.

User avatar
tiho_d
Posts: 1200
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2011 1:14 pm
Platform: Linux + Windows

Wed Mar 18, 2020 12:16 am Post

I do agree that there are superior ways to handle the Inspector Footnotes styling, but this is not something we want to adjust or introduce at this stage. First of all we try to match the Scrivener for Mac v3 functionality. This is feature request which makes sense, and could be added to our "suggestions" list for further in-house discussion.

User avatar
narrsd
Posts: 716
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 8:34 pm
Platform: Win + iOS

Wed Mar 18, 2020 12:58 am Post

@tiho_d, thanks -- here's a zipped fresh small project, A Footnote, with Word output.

Again, if I haven't missed something important.

The Footnote font originally said it was Palatino Linotype 10, but came out in the compile as Sitka Small 10.
The footnote format was 1,2,3

I saved these changes, using a duplicate of Default. namedFootnote Format:
Footnote font: Arial Italic 12
footnote format: a,b,c

But as the Word doc shows, I still got Sitka Small 10 and 1,2,3
Changes are in the project
Attachments
A Footnote.scriv.zip
(40.23 KiB) Downloaded 317 times

User avatar
jje
Posts: 339
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 5:57 pm
Platform: Windows
Location: Sussex, UK

Wed Mar 18, 2020 8:44 am Post

tiho_d wrote:1) Check RTF Compatibilty "Ensure hyperlinks are colored and underlined"
2) Not sure what you mean by that.
3) Check the compile format "Footnotes & Comments" > Override font.


Thanks for the helpful info. I was using the "default" compile output style, which you can't edit, so I hadn't seen these options. I duplicated and edited it, which solved problems one and three. However, my Scrivener project uses the UK English spelling dictionary, as does my default Ms Word style, but the compiled document from Scrivener defaults to US English:

Screenshot.jpg
Screenshot.jpg (91.37 KiB) Viewed 1697 times


-- so all my correct (e.g. s not z) spellings are flagged. Obviously, that's really easy to fix in Word, but I thought I would let you know.

Once again, thanks for the prompt assistance.

User avatar
jje
Posts: 339
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 5:57 pm
Platform: Windows
Location: Sussex, UK

Wed Mar 18, 2020 8:47 am Post

biblioman wrote:What is much more disappointing for me, even unbelievable, is the fact that the developers have not seen [snip]


Please may I suggest that everyone takes a minute to think about their tone before they post (here, or anywhere else online)? The whole world is feeling stressed and anxious right now, for obvious reasons, and this level of near-hysteria over a trivial feature in an as-yet unfinished piece of software seems a bit unhelpful.

User avatar
xiamenese
Posts: 4370
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 1:32 am
Platform: Mac
Location: London or Exeter, UK.

Wed Mar 18, 2020 9:43 am Post

jje wrote:
biblioman wrote:What is much more disappointing for me, even unbelievable, is the fact that the developers have not seen [snip]


Please may I suggest that everyone takes a minute to think about their tone before they post (here, or anywhere else online)? The whole world is feeling stressed and anxious right now, for obvious reasons, and this level of near-hysteria over a trivial feature in an as-yet unfinished piece of software seems a bit unhelpful.

Spot on, @JJE.

May I also point out that the compiling default to US spelling also happens—and has always happened in my experience—with the Mac version. I'd always assumed it was something to do with the OS and beyond Keith's—or in your case LAP and Tiho_D's—control.

As you say, it's easy to correct, but a little nuisance nevertheless.

:)

Mark
The Scrivenato sometimes known as Mr X.
iMac 27" (late 2015) 10.15.4, 24GB RAM, 512GB SSID
MBP17" (late 2011) 10.13.6, 16GB RAM, 2TB SSID
2017 iPad, iPadOS 13.3, 128GB, Apple Pencil
Scrivener, Scapple, Nisus Writer Pro, Bookends …

bi
biblioman
Posts: 104
Joined: Sat May 26, 2018 11:08 pm
Platform: Windows

Wed Mar 18, 2020 12:07 pm Post

tiho_d wrote:The "senseless advice" about the override font option is a working advice in the current state, to the problem of changing the font family of Inspector footnotes. I can always give "nice to have" advices which will not help. Which one do you prefer?


Well, the former is preferable. Even though the advice in question was in fact for me too and proved to be senseless.

tiho_d wrote:I do agree that there are superior ways to handle the Inspector Footnotes styling, but this is not something we want to adjust or introduce at this stage. First of all we try to match the Scrivener for Mac v3 functionality. This is feature request which makes sense, and could be added to our "suggestions" list for further in-house discussion.


Thanks a lot, it seems the first time I've got some response on the matter in question from the devs.

To be clear, two things. It never occured to me to insist on any improvement, or fix, or option, nor to hurry up the developers team just because it was something important for me personally. This case is the same—since the last year, I do not expect that you solve the problem by the final release. But I am still really worried about the approach: syntactically correct export of the document markup is not an option, it's core functionality of the app. If you, say, export half of the existing paragraph styles, or even all but a random one, it is definitely an error. So just keep it as this, please. It is by no means about when you are going to correct it, but about your understanding of styles in general, which is critically important for me as a user.

jje wrote:
biblioman wrote:What is much more disappointing for me, even unbelievable, is the fact that the developers have not seen [snip]
Please may I suggest that everyone takes a minute to think about their tone before they post (here, or anywhere else online)? The whole world is feeling stressed and anxious right now, for obvious reasons, and this level of near-hysteria over a trivial feature in an as-yet unfinished piece of software seems a bit unhelpful.


Well, it was not to insult anybody, so sorry if it happened to touch you. Anyway, so far as you had some time to give me an advice on my tone, could you frame any objections or comments on what I said? Please, note that it was by no means about «yet unfinished piece of software» (see above).

User avatar
jje
Posts: 339
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 5:57 pm
Platform: Windows
Location: Sussex, UK

Wed Mar 18, 2020 2:40 pm Post

biblioman wrote:Well, it was not to insult anybody, so sorry if it happened to touch you. Anyway, so far as you had some time to give me an advice on my tone, could you frame any objections or comments on what I said?


Well, I don't want to escalate this, but I just felt that "senseless advice" was a bit rude (Tiho's advice worked perfectly when I tried it).

Similarly your comment that it was "unbelievable... that the developers" had made an "essential conceptual error" rather implied that you think they are idiots and haven't even considered these issues. In fact L&L have said many times on this forum that they are focussing on getting Windows 3 features to match those of Mac version 3 (Tiho just said it again in this discussion).

Once V3 is s done, new features (like the one you've requested) will be considered; I would also like to see more robust and useful styles, including a footnote style, in Scrivener 3.1. However, I'm sure that L&L already have a long wish list from users, and they won't be able to do them all (and will, of course, also decide not to implement some, for perfectly good reasons). In the meantime, apologies if I caused offence -- that wasn't my intention.

User avatar
jje
Posts: 339
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 5:57 pm
Platform: Windows
Location: Sussex, UK

Wed Mar 18, 2020 2:43 pm Post

xiamenese wrote:May I also point out that the compiling default to US spelling also happens—and has always happened in my experience—with the Mac version. I'd always assumed it was something to do with the OS and beyond Keith's—or in your case LAP and Tiho_D's—control.


You may indeed; thanks for the info (I've never used a Mac, so had no idea). Clearly doesn't need to be prioritised, but if it could be fixed, that would be a nice, helpful bit of extra icing on the cake (once the cake is finally baked and ready for us all to consume).

User avatar
tiho_d
Posts: 1200
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2011 1:14 pm
Platform: Linux + Windows

Wed Mar 18, 2020 3:56 pm Post

@narrsd: I checked your project. There was only one custom compile format "Paperback (6" x 9") Test New Page HeaderFooter", so I believe this is the one you were testing. This compile format specifies in "Footnotes & Comments" as an override font "Palatino Linotype" 9pts. Your Inspector Footnotes use "Sitka Small" 10 pts inside the main Scrivener GUI. When compiled to DOCX using the above format, the Inspector footnotes were formatted with "Palatino Linotype" 9pts as expected. From what I have seen and tested this feature works as expected.