Custom text variables

[steday]

I come back to text variable : 

It should be useful if we have a special character to identify text variable. Perhaps a light border around (as in InDesign).

And to have the possibility to find / replace text with a text variable.

[carl123]

25 minutes ago, steday said:

I come back to text variable : 

It should be useful if we have a special character to identify text variable. Perhaps a light border around (as in InDesign).

 

Text > Highlight Fields will highlight all text variables in your document

[Sean P]

18 hours ago, Hangman said:

Hi @Sean P,

Two more possible issues...

When the placeholder text is replaced with 'actual' text, should the actual text be included in the page word count? Currently, it isn't...

One mild annoyance, though this is true of all fields but especially of the custom fields... when double-clicking to insert placeholder text it would be great if the focus automatically reverted to back the page so you can continue typing (or to add a space if adding multiple fields adjacent to each other), currently you type, double-click to insert a placeholder you then have to click back on the page before you can continue typing...

 

Expanding the field into actual text is including it in the word count here. See video below. With regards to it not being included prior to that it is something we're aware of and have logged.

I will pass on the focus on insert issue as well to see if that can sorted.

 

[Hangman]

Hi @Sean P,

Ah, okay, I hadn't realised the custom field text had to be expanded first so that all makes sense now...

Thanks for passing on the focus 'issue' as well, it would be very helpful if that could be 'improved'...

[Sean P]

1 hour ago, Hangman said:

Thanks for passing on the focus 'issue' as well, it would be very helpful if that could be 'improved'...

Do you mind attaching a video demonstrating this please? I'm likely misinterpreting the steps you're doing but I'm not seeing this on macOS or Windows. If I type some text and then double click a field name, I can still carry on typing without changing focus.

Likewise if I edit a custom field's contents I can carry on typing in the text frame without issue.

[Hangman]

Hi @Sean P,

This is more to do with inserting already created custom fields. If you are wanting to insert custom fields into existing text, double-clicking the custom field removes the focus from the page so to do something as simple as adding a space after the inserted field you first have to click back on the page to do so...

Likewise, if you are composing text and inserting custom fields as you type you have the same issue, double-clicking a custom field removes the focus from the page, so you type, double-click your custom field but you have to then click back on the page before you can continue typing which makes for a very disjointed workflow.

The ideal would be that you type, double-click a custom field to insert it and simply continue typing because the focus never leaves the page...

 

[4dimage]

1 hour ago, Hangman said:

Hi @Sean P,

This is more to do with inserting already created custom fields. If you are wanting to insert custom fields into existing text, double-clicking the custom field removes the focus from the page so to do something as simple as adding a space after the inserted field you first have to click back on the page to do so...

 

Likewise, if you are composing text and inserting custom fields as you type you have the same issue, double-clicking a custom field removes the focus from the page, so you type, double-click your custom field but you have to then click back on the page before you can continue typing which makes for a very disjointed workflow.

The ideal would be that you type, double-click a custom field to insert it and simply continue typing because the focus never leaves the page...

 

 

 

I can't reproduce this focus problem on Windows. It seems that the input focus remains in the text frame after inserting a custom field by doubleclicking in the fields panel (as intended). Sorry for having no visual mouse-action marker in the video. I don't click into the text frame inbetween. The cursor stays active in the text so i can type the next letter directly after inserting the field by doubleclicking in the panel. This also applies when the panel is docked in the UI.

But another bug: at the end, after changing the field value in the panel, only the second text frame is updated.

 

 

[Hangman]

23 minutes ago, 4dimage said:

I can't reproduce this focus problem on Windows. It seems that the input focus remains in the text frame after inserting a custom field by doubleclicking in the fields panel (as intended).

Interesting, so it's looking like a Windows specific issue in that case...

I don't have any issues when adding a new custom field as shown in @Sean P's screen recording but I believe @MikeTO is also experiencing the same issue when double-clicking a custom field to add it to the text frame on macOS...

I'm not seeing any issue when duplicating a text frame and inserting the same custom fields, in that instance, updating the variable updates all the placeholders in both text frames...

[Sean P]

1 hour ago, Hangman said:

Interesting, so it's looking like a Windows specific issue in that case...

I don't have any issues when adding a new custom field as shown in @Sean P's screen recording but I believe @MikeTO is also experiencing the same issue when double-clicking a custom field to add it to the text frame on macOS...

I'm not seeing any issue when duplicating a text frame and inserting the same custom fields, in that instance, updating the variable updates all the placeholders in both text frames...

 

I think the key difference here is the docked state of the Fields Panel. With the Panel floating I have no issues on macOS, but with it docked the focus is lost as your video shows. This was why I couldn't reproduce earlier as I've been using the Panel floating. So I can now get this logged. Windows is without issue when it is both docked and floating as 4dimage's video shows. I'll now get this logged.

4dimage,

Unfortunately however, I cannot reproduce the lack of updating when using two frames. Both are updating for me after changing a value on Windows, though there is a very slight delay to the other frame. I've tried it using both German and English as well as OpenCl on and off.

I'll be interested to see if you can reproduce it with my document.

 

 

DocumentTest.afpub

[Hangman]

4 minutes ago, Sean P said:

I think the key difference here is the docked state of the Fields Panel. With the Panel floating I have no issues on macOS, but with it docked the focus is lost as your video shows. This was why I couldn't reproduce earlier as I've been using the Panel floating. So I can now get this logged. Windows is without issue when it is both docked and floating as 4dimage's video shows. I'll now get this logged.

Good spot, I'd not picked up on that and yes, undocked there is no issue with page focus. Thanks for checking and for logging in the meantime...

[4dimage]

44 minutes ago, Sean P said:

4dimage,

Unfortunately however, I cannot reproduce the lack of updating when using two frames. Both are updating for me after changing a value on Windows, though there is a very slight delay to the other frame. I've tried it using both German and English as well as OpenCl on and off.

I'll be interested to see if you can reproduce it with my document.

It's a little bit confusing. The update error seems to occur as soon as i select the second (bottom) text frame. Either select the second text frame Object as a whole or setting the text cursor inside the frame.

 

The internal IDs in the layer preview look the same ?

[Sean P]

Thanks for that! Looking at your screenshot I think your running a Display DPI in Windows of 100% - setting that makes your issue reproducible for me. Adjusting the zoom does then correct the first frame so it does look to just be a minor redraw.

If I set mine back to 150% it refreshes for me as you saw in my video! Do you mind trying that on yours for me please? It seems to be that way on a couple of machines here so does seem fairly simple to reproduce. I'll then get that logged. 
Thanks!

[4dimage]

18 minutes ago, Sean P said:

Thanks for that! Looking at your screenshot I think your running a Display DPI in Windows of 100% - setting that makes your issue reproducible. Adjusting the zoom, does then correct the first frame so its just a minor redraw.

If I set mine back to 150% it refreshes for me as you saw in my video! Do you mind trying that on yours for me please?

Sean, you are right! A quick zoom change updates the viewport and all text frames are rerendered correctly. So, the devs can easily fix this 😁

 

[Sean P]

1 minute ago, 4dimage said:

Sean, you are right! A quick zoom change updates the viewport and all text frames are rerendered correctly. So, the devs can easily can fix this 😁

 

Great stuff! 

Thank you very much for confirming. I'll get this logged!  

[joe_l]

I am just asking myself if it could be useful a variable to be an image? Not having a use case for this, but this could be a nice addition.

[garrettm30]

Maybe this feature is yet to be expanded after the basic functionality is sorted out, but I had expected that the custom variables would have basically the same dynamic nature as the field called “Running Headers.” Sometimes a book might need more than one dynamic variable, and I am not sure this is possible even in the new beta. Sometimes even actual running headers need more than one dynamic variable. For example, for in the Bible that I did the layout for a few years ago in InDesign, the running headers had to use two different dynamic variables based on text styles: a book name and a verse-chapter reference (a very common feature in most Bibles, similar to the headers in a dictionary). As I understand it, it still does not seem that this is possible in Publisher.

I’m in no hurry, but when the time is right, I suggest you consider allowing custom variables to be defined with the same or similar functionality as the existing “Running Header” field type. Of course, this would not be to exclude the possibility of variables with a fixed value as in the current beta. Perhaps the “Custom field properties” is so named using the plural because it is in anticipation of additional features for custom fields even though currently the only property there is the field name.

[walt.farrell]

13 minutes ago, garrettm30 said:

I’m in no hurry, but when the time is right, I suggest you consider allowing custom variables to be defined with the same or similar functionality as the existing “Running Header” field type. Of course, this would not be to exclude the possibility of variables with a fixed value as in the current beta. Perhaps the “Custom field properties” is so named using the plural because it is in anticipation of additional features for custom fields even though currently the only property there is the field name.

From what you're describing, something more like Cross References and their Presets might be needed, where the Running Header (or the Custom Field) could have fixed text and variable-names defined in it.

 

[Old Bruce]

23 minutes ago, garrettm30 said:

the running headers had to use two different dynamic variables based on text styles: a book name and a verse-chapter reference (a very common feature in most Bibles, similar to the headers in a dictionary). As I understand it, it still does not seem that this is possible in Publisher.

Use one instance of a Running header for the Book Name. A second for the Chapter & Verse first on page and if needed a third for the Chapter and Verse last on page.

I think I agree with your desire for actual variables in the custom variables, but I am at a bit of a loss with coming up with a concrete example of something I would use. I shall ponder it for a while.

[garrettm30]

23 minutes ago, Old Bruce said:

Use one instance of a Running header for the Book Name. A second […]

I did not know you could have more than one instance of the “Running Header” defined each to a different text style. The Fields studio leaves the impression that the Running Header can be configured to only one text style. Do you happen to still have that sample document so you could share it and I could play with it a bit? I don’t understand how to do it, or how to edit the running header parametiers field if there is more than one.

[Old Bruce]

1 hour ago, garrettm30 said:

Do you happen to still have that sample document so you could share it and I could play with it a bit?

It is just a quick proof of concept pastiche.

first three chaps.afpub

[garrettm30]

18 hours ago, Old Bruce said:

It is just a quick proof of concept

A proof of concept is all I needed. Thank you so much for explaining. Now I understand how to have multiple instances of a “running header.” 

With that improved understanding thanks to Old Bruce, back to my feedback…

So for the most part, it seems like the functionality for multiple dynamic variables is already there, with the exception that they cannot be named or edited with in the Fields panel in any way other than individually. The way it is presented seems to be a misfit. For one thing, the name “running header” seems off, because although very often they would be used in that way, apparently it can be used anywhere anytime a dynamic variable based on a text style is desired. But what led most to my confusion is that the Running Header section in the fields behaves differently than (I think) all of the other fields—well, date also. For all the other fields, they will always behave in a consistent way across the document. For editable fields, such as Author, if you edit the field, it edits it everywhere in the document at once, but not so with Running Headers and Date.

I made a video to illustrate the difference, but I changed my mind thinking no one would want to watch it. The gist is that I think Running Headers and Date should work globally like all the other fields, so that it works consistently and therefore works in an expected way, but also gives a convenient way to edit those globally. I would move both “Running Header” and date down to custom section. Currently the new custom variables/fields of a text type, just as Author, Comments, etc. I suggest making possible other types of custom variables, such as the “Running Header” type based on style (it should probably be renamed), date and time, and probably there could be others, such as sequential counter, whatever.

To illustrate, let’s take the date field. Let’s say I use the date many times throughout the document, but as time goes on, I decide I wanted the date syntax done slightly differently. If it were like the other fields, I could just change its property once and it would update everywhere. But with date, I have to select each instance and then make the changes one by one. It would be better if I could have defined one date custom variable set up the way I wanted, then I could change all of them later if I wanted to. Or maybe I have two: longDate and shortDate each as custom variables.

A slight variation to this idea is to leave Running Header and Date where they are rather than move them to custom, but make it still behave globally. And so that users can add more than one, add an option to add additional fields of the same type, maybe Date 2, Date 3, etc. This option would also solve the double problem of making this discoverable and providing the same convenient global editing that the other fields already have.

I hope this makes sense—maybe I should have just posted the video. Anyway, there may be some better ideas, but I think the current behavior of the Fields studio where two of the fields work in a completely different way than all the others invites rethinking.

 

[Seneca]

3 hours ago, garrettm30 said:

but I think the current behavior of the Fields studio where two of the fields work in a completely different way than all the others invites rethinking

Hello @garrettm30,

I think we should not conflate custom fields and running headers into one thing.

They should remain separate because they serve different purposes.

Custom fields are just that. They contain the text you decide to have like, Date, Magazine Number, Issue Name, etc.

Running Headers instead, are driven by Text Styles, Paragraph Styles or Character Styles. You do not get to decide what goes into those field. The program pulls that information from the pages.

So, while custom Fields are global, the Running Headers are not and can change according to the content on the page.

If you search for the discussion on Running Headers you will find that the bible problem was discussed already and we need very little to make the running headers in the bible work. 

 

[walt.farrell]

On 7/26/2023 at 3:11 PM, Old Bruce said:

It is just a quick proof of concept pastiche.

first three chaps.afpub

Thanks for (a) mentioning that multiple Running Headers with different settings are possible and (b) providing a sample.

I have to say that that is a very hidden (and undocumented) function, and something of an unworkable UI.

In your sample you have at least 3 different kinds of Running Header, but all are simply labeled <Running Header> on the Master Page. And they are not identified specifically as Running Headers on the document pages, so there is nothing there to distinguish them from other fields. So, on a Master Page, to tell how  each will be filled, you need to right-click on the field and choose Edit Field.... Or, on a Document Page, to tell if something is a normal Field or a Running Header, you need to right-click and see if you have an Edit Field... entry in the right-click menu. Then you need to click Edit Field... to see what it contains.

Also, and possibly bugs:

1. If a Document Page has inherited a Running Header from a Master Page, you can change the formatting from the Document Page (right-click, Edit Field...) rather than changing it on the Master Page, and you don't need to use Edit Detached or Edit Linked. (It's done like Detached, by the way, and doesn't affect other pages.)
2. Even if you use Edit Linked, a Running Header format change made via Edit Field... on a Document Page doesn't affect the Master, nor other Document pages.

I know this is not really about Custom Text Variables, and perhaps should be posted elsewhere. But it is somewhat related given the common usage of the Fields panel, even though Running Headers were a new function in 2.1.

[garrettm30]

1 hour ago, walt.farrell said:

I have to say that that is a very hidden (and undocumented) function, and something of an unworkable UI.

That is basically my point, and you have illustrated it from a different perspective. Thank you.

 

1 hour ago, walt.farrell said:

I know this is not really about Custom Text Variables, and perhaps should be posted elsewhere.

Perhaps it is not about custom text variables as they are currently implemented, but as we are discussing feedback about the current implementation, I do think it is important here. I would like to point out that what we are talking about are indeed text variables, as many of the people who are coming from InDesign who are making the request for text variables have this in mind. To illustrate, here is a picture of InDesign’s text variable interface as I used it for running headers in that Bible project several years ago.

I also do not think InDesign was inaccurate in using the term “text variable,” as it indeed is variable text that will be inserted at a given location. When InDesign folks are going to see that “custom text variables” are a new feature of Publisher 2.2, they may end up disappointed when they see it is more limited than they were expecting.

Having said all of that, I recognize and can appreciate that what we are looking at in this Publisher beta may not be Serif’s end goal for this feature. I only mean to leave feedback about the current form. However, as far as functionality, it seems that Publisher has basically already got what it needs; it is just the interface is a bit clunky here.

[Ash]

Hi @garrettm30

Thanks for this feedback, I think some of what you are saying does have merit for future consideration. However, I would say that the requests for "Custom Text Variables" which we have received - both on this forum and with many of our enterprise customers - we feel is very well aligned with the feature we have introduced as it was basically to allow the equivalent to the "Custom Text" type of variable available in InDesign. So personally I'm not concerned with our terminology for this particular feature.