APub — wrong initial defaults for "Distance from Text" and "Lock Edges" when applying text wrap

[bbrother]

App: APub 2.4.0
OS: Windows 10 Pro 22H2

It happens in an existing or new document. Reseting the app back to it's defaults (Ctrl-method) doesn't help.

Steps to reproduce:

1. Create new document.
2. Create an text frame an fill it with placeholder text.
3. Place an object  (image, shape whatever) over the text frame.
4. Click "Show Text Wrap Settings" on the toolbar.

What happens after step (4):

The "Text wrap" dialog  will open with the following initial defaults settings:

• [Wrap style] = none, wchich is OK
• [Wrap type] = undefined/unselected, wich is OK
• [Distance from text] = 1,1mm for all (left, right, top, bottom), wchich is not OK.
• [Lock Edges] = unlocked/OFF, wchich is not OK.

What i would expect to hapen after step (4):

The "Text wrap" dialog will open but the initial defaults values for the atrributes listed below should be set as follow:

• [Distance from text] = 0mm for all (left, right, top, bottom) and the edges should be locked (lock edges icon).
• [Lock Edges] = locked/ON,

When applying text wrapping settings to an object for which we are doing it for the first time and which did not previously have these settings, the initial default value for "Distance from text" should be 0mm not 1.1mm.

The "Lock Edges" option should be enabled by default. It's more logical and intuitive approach. Then consistency would be maintained with similar functions, such as corner rounding, where only after unchecking the "Single radius" checkbox, you can set the radius separately for all corners of the rectangle, otherwise the edit affects all corners.

 

[Chris_06]

I was able to duplicate this and concur with the suggestion that the default distance should be 0mm and the edges locked on as in other places.

 

[MikeTO]

I believe this is by design and not a bug.

If there's no default value for Distance From Text then the object will touch the text as shown below and most users wouldn't want the object to touch. I find the current 1mm or 0p3 in picas to be useful.

I agree that the Lock icon should default to on. Those icons are always on when I think they should be off and off when I think they should be on. 🙂 

But here's a bug with this dialog, I just noticed that Text Wrap has a focus issue. With the studios opened and Layers panel docked, enter a value into Text Wrap's Left field and press Tab. The Right field should have focus but it doesn't, focus isn't in a text field and keystrokes are passed to the main document window (typing a number will change Opacity in Layers).

Press Tab again and Left will have focus again. Press it again to move to Right. Enter a value and press Tab. Now press Tab twice more to move to the Top field. Tedious.

0.042 in

[Chris_06]

There is a real issue with the entire text wrap in that it does not reliably play well with the text flowing around the object. Its a bit complicated to describe which is why I've not taken time to open a bug report on it. And it is possible to mung around with things until the optics are acceptable.

Text wrap and flow are complicated interactions to handle programmatically I'm sure.

[MikeTO]

41 minutes ago, Chris_06 said:

There is a real issue with the entire text wrap in that it does not reliably play well with the text flowing around the object. Its a bit complicated to describe which is why I've not taken time to open a bug report on it. And it is possible to mung around with things until the optics are acceptable.

Could you show a screenshot of the problem?

[bbrother]

3 hours ago, MikeTO said:

If there's no default value for Distance From Text then the object will touch the text as shown below and most users wouldn't want the object to touch.

The fact that the object touches the text until you set the appropriate value is not a problem. 
This is what this dialog box is for, to set the appropriate text wrapping method and the distance between the object and the text.
And that's what the user should do after opening it.

3 hours ago, MikeTO said:

I find the current 1mm or 0p3 in picas to be useful

I'm not. Most users will change this value to a different one anyway.

The purpose of this dialog box is to apply and reflect text wrapping settings for the selected object.
When you do it for the first time for an objects, this object does not have text wrapping settings, so the "Distance From Text" value should be 0mm.

Setting it to 1.1 mm by default or any other value doesn't help, but at the same time it makes the settings look contradictory:
[Wrap Style] = none ≠ [Distance From Text] = 1.1mm.

@MikeTO There is no need to reinvent the wheel here for the "Text wrap".
InDesign opens up with a 0 value so APub should either. It's more logical than to supply an default value that will be overridden by the user anyway.

[Old Bruce]

5 minutes ago, bbrother said:

[Wrap Style] = none ≠ [Distance From Text] = 1.1mm.

<Pedant on>

[Wrap Style] = none ≠ [Distance From Text] = 0.0mm. is as correct or wrong. 

<Pedant off>

No default value is ever going to please everyone.

[Chris_06]

3 hours ago, MikeTO said:

Could you show a screenshot of the problem?

I'll be working on a publication in the next few weeks where the issue appears. I'll probably open a different thread and post some pics there.

[bbrother]

On 3/15/2024 at 7:18 PM, Old Bruce said:

No default value is ever going to please everyone.

This is not an expectation to please everyone.
It's not about being pedantic either.
It's about being consistent and logical.

[bbrother]

@Lee_T I played around with text wrap a bit last night again and noticed that:

A — For images (layer type: image) the initial defaults are as follow:

• [Wrap style] = none, wchich is OK
• [Wrap type] = undefined/unselected, wich is OK
• [Distance from text] = 0mm for all (left, right, top, bottom), wchich is OK.
• [Lock Edges] = unlocked/OFF, wchich is not OK.

B — For picture frames (picture frame layer type) the initial defaults are as follow:

• [Wrap style] = none, wchich is OK
• [Wrap type] = undefined/unselected, wich is OK
• [Distance from text] = 1,1mm for all (left, right, top, bottom), wchich is not OK.
• [Lock Edges] = unlocked/OFF, wchich is not OK.

C — For shapes (rect, ellipse, triangle etc) the initial defaults are as follow:

• Same as for picture frames.

D — For paths created using pen tool the initial defaults are as follow:

• Same as for picture frames.

 

The conclusion:

is that in the case of images (layer type: image), the initial defaults for Text wrap are the closest to what is expected and how it should be. 
Only [Lock Edges] option in those type of layers is wrong.

Just change the [Lock Edges] option for images (layer type: image) to "Lock/ON". You will then be able to use this layer type as a template for all type of objects how the initial defaults for text wrap options should be setted up.

[bbrother]

Hello, No one on staff is interested in this report? There will be no reaction?😞

It would be good to get answers from the staff to a few things like:

• Whether this is an bug?,
• Assign a bug reference to the post if necessary?,
• Why this inconsistency in initial default values when applying text wrapping to different types of objects?

 

 

[Old Bruce]

13 hours ago, bbrother said:

Why this inconsistency in initial default values when applying text wrapping to different types of objects?

Most likely when the defaults were set a simple mistake was made, resulting in them being not the same. Or someone decided that the way it is is the way it should be. Much the same as you wanting the initial values to be 0.0 instead of 1.1.

[bbrother]

10 hours ago, Old Bruce said:

Most likely when the defaults were set a simple mistake was made, resulting in them being not the same

Attention to detail and consistency is a sign of professionalism.

 

10 hours ago, Old Bruce said:

Or someone decided that the way it is is the way it should be. Much the same as you wanting the initial values to be 0.0 instead of 1.1.

I see no rational reason for objects of a type other than image to use different default settings than those used for images. I gave arguments for this earlier in this thread.

I also don't really understand that there is no reaction from the moderator or staff to this report.
This behavior is amateurish.