Jump to content
You must now use your email address to sign in [click for more info] ×

robinp

Members
  • Posts

    467
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by robinp

  1. A further issue on this, when dropping an image into a frame, the rotation of the image appears to be somewhat random. Earlier I did one that was 90 degrees off, and just now, 180 degrees off. I presume this is because AP isn't paying any attention to the rotation settings of the incoming photo that was set when the picture was taken?
  2. OK, I've now found the image frame settings. I have to say that while the idea of have settings like these is good, I don't like it, or at least, I don't like the way it is currently implemented. Maybe there are just many unfinished elements to this feature, that might make it work well. For example, the frame doesn't seem to snap to the edges of the image (even though the image snaps to the frame). This on its own could be a big improvement. The other thing is that if the image is not fully inside the frame when one of the frame property options is selected (eg max size), it stays partially outside of the frame even though it has been resized to fit the frame. Most strange and I assume a bug. But I would still rather all images that are placed go into frames.
  3. What do you mean by resized and positioned dynamically? Do you mean if I were to adjust the margins of the document the frame would adjust with it? I still think it would be helpful to have an option (a sticky one as well) that you can select when placing an image so that when placing it, it automatically places it within a frame. Is there a way this can be done or do I have to create a frame, then place the image? (that's an extra step that I don't think should be necessary)
  4. When alt-dragging snaps do not seem to work. This is a minor annoyance because it only requires releasing the mouse button and dragging again to seemingly activate the snaps. It would be better if snaps worked immediately though.
  5. When inserting text into a document, often bullets get included as part of the text rather than as a style attribute. This is normal and to be expected. I have tried to use 'find and replace' to delete them out of a long bullet list. Unfortunately find and replace doesn't seem to work unless there is something entered into the 'replace with' box. What if I want to replace with nothing? Also, doing command+F seems to cause a crash unless working within a text frame.
  6. I use two monitors. When opening specific windows for tools, often they open on the other screen to the one I'm using for Publisher. Sometimes, they even open almost entirely off the side of the other screen. This makes finding them REALLY difficult if you're working with multiple files / apps at the same time. Please make the preferences and resource manager windows open in the same location as the main app window. Thanks.
  7. I have just noticed that if placing an image into a blank 'image frame' the frame bounding box is controllable much in the way that a frame is controllable in InDesign. This compares to just simply placing an image directly into the document where the image behaves more like an image might in say, word or pages, where the image is its own object and adjust the clipping of the image requires using the crop tool. It strikes me that this is slightly strange. There are two entirely different ways to achieve something very similar. It then raises the possibility of having both methods live in the same document which could get rather confusing. My preference would be that placing an image (in whatever way you choose) would result in an image within an image frame. I appreciate that this is perhaps just because this is what I'm more used to with ID and perhaps there might be the odd situation where having an image not in a frame could be helpful? Are there any such situations?
  8. So while I like that there is now a setting within the document settings for defaulting to linked vs embedded, when dragging and dropping an image onto a frame, this choice is ignored. I don't think there is any need to go over all the points from earlier threads about how essential it is to have a robust setting that ensures documents are set up with linked files rather than embedded. If it were up to me, I would like to have a setting to turn off embedded files entirely. There is simply no need for them at all in our workflow. Embedded = BAD. @Dave Harris
  9. Actually, I've now tried creating a completely new file and it also crashes any trying to do any kind of edit to the separator. Edit: See above, apparently it is fixed. Just testing now.
  10. Just had a complete crash on trying to delete the default 'separator' within the table panel. It keeps doing it so it is repeatable. I will save the file for sharing with Serif via private link. @Dave Harris @MEB @Chris_K EDIT: just seen that there is a new beta released on Friday that lists this as fixed. Sorry.
  11. Thanks, I was pulling my hair out over this. Clearly AP needs to be fixed in this regard, with settings on how to assess hierarchy within a page. Presumably the default should be from left to right and top to bottom, and in that order so that columns work effectively. Some languages or even some layouts, may require a different parsing to determine intended hierarchy. I would suggest that additionally a hierarchy could be defined through text styles. Clearly Heading 1 should appear above Heading 2 but defining hierarchy based on the style name could be quite confusing and require a certain rigour when setting up the file. It is also not necessarily obvious from a UI / UX point of view. However, I setting in the Table of Contents panel or in the text styles panel would be great to supplement the necessary default behaviours described above. It's an interesting problem and one I've never really thought about before because InDesign seems to generally get it right without much effort or messing about.
  12. Two things: 1- The content is confidential so please deal with it in a suitable manner. Please do not pass it on and it is only to be used for tracking down this bug 2- Is the above link a standard link if I need to send files in the future?
  13. I've managed to dig out the file from before it went wrong and immediately after it went wrong and can send it to you but I'm not putting them on a public forum.
  14. I think there could be clean and easy ways to arrange it so that tags could work. The advantage they have over folders is that any given style could have multiple tags so you could arrange them in numerous ways depending on what you're working on at the time. Could be really powerful.
  15. Can you provide a direct / private upload link @Chris_K ? thanks
  16. I had it saved for a while but after no response to it for a while I deleted it. I'll see if I can dig out from our back ups.
  17. OK, understood. But it still doesn't really explain the purpose of Group Styles. They are a poor way to organise because it necessitates selecting the Group Style in the Based on setting, thereby meaning you can't actually base the style on on something else; and I can't see why having a Group Style not being able to be applied is actually a feature? How is that better than just a normal style? For example, if I go back to my example previously: Main styles: Heading 1 Heading 2 Body Bullet list Number list Appendix styles Heading 1 Heading 2 Body Bullet list Number list To set up the above, you would have two Styles or Group Styles called 'Main' and 'Appendix' and then set the individual styles as Based on the Styles or Group Styles. However, you might want the appendix body style to be based on the main body style and the Appendix Bullet list to be based on the Main Bullet list. With the Group Styles system (feature?!) I can't see how that would be possible because doing so would move the Appendix Bullet list to be 'under' the Main Bullet list in the hierarchical view. Essentially, folders or tags would be hugely more flexible and useful. Personally, I would ditch Group Styles and replace with something useful and more flexible.
  18. Thanks, so I really can’t see what a ‘group style’ would do that a folder structure wouldn’t do, but folders seem much more flexible. A group style does less than a basic style that others are based on because a group style can’t actually be applied. A group style cannot contain disparate styles in a way that allows you to organise by document section or type (as I noted above) It seems to me that group styles are superfluous and effort and UI space would be better devoted to a folder or tag system for organising styles. Is there a single use case where a group style does more than a basic style that others are based on?
  19. I was paraphrasing the gist of what you were saying. Sorry if it came across as me directly quoting you. I have given it a go. Not sure what gave you the impression I hadn’t? I just don’t underestand the doubling up of this feature. It is confusing and I genuinely can’t see a solid reason for it. Can you give me an example of a use case where havingboth ‘based on’ and ‘group styles’ would of benefit? @Chris_K @MEB maybe one of you could explain what the intention is? Thanks.
  20. I’m sorry but I don’t buy the ‘more options are better’ argument it is just bad design to have two features that essentially do the same thing. Doing so makes it confusing because the app is more cluttered. It also makes it more difficult for different people to pick up working on a document that another person has worked on. It’s all very well being in your own bubble but it is essential that it is as easy as possible for someone to open a document and immediately get to work on the the file. If there are different ways of achieving essentially the same thing, it is going to make it challenging. I don’t mind which it is, and unless someone can provide a compelling use case for having them both, we should have either ‘based on ‘ or ‘group styles’. Folders on the other hand would be very handy. Perhaps even better would be tags so that you could sort / search them as required on the fly.
  21. Hi, I think currently there is no way to create template documents other than manually managing them yourself. Ie, there is nothing stopping you using a particular file as a template. I haven’t done it yet in Publisher but I understand it is possible to import styles from one document into another. In this way, you could have a template or series of template files set up which have the styles required for different types of documents and then either duplicate / save as or create a new file and import the styles. As for a more flexible way of organising styles, I think there is currently no way to do this. The best idea so far is to have folders so you can drag and drop styles into folders as required.
  22. But isn’t that exactly what the ‘based on’ feature achieves? I just can’t see how or why having both would be desirable. I can only see situations where it is unclear whether a particular style setting is being derived from the group style or from the ‘based on’ style. Indeed, in hierarchical view, they appear much the same. Having one or other of Group styles or Based on feature and a folder structure would give a lot of flexibility. Currently it appears to just be confusing.
  23. Thanks, but I do understand the basic principle of ‘based on’ and it is very helpful. The question was what and how this differs from a ‘group style’. Anyone know?
  24. No worries. I can't reproduce it either. One thing that I did when creating the frame was to drag from bottom left to top right. Not sure if that is part of the recipe to recreate the bug. Trying it again hasn't had that effect. Will keep an eye out for it happening again.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.