Problems with CR4 tool bar

Much thanks John!!!!

Since this takes care of all my problems AND seems to have solved global warming, you get an ATTABOY from me too.

Related to the other question regarding MACs, I have absolutely no ideas, but we have many MAC users who might be able to help.

Bill

FYI, this wasn't supposed to BE a problem, just a 'new feature', kind of like the 'undocumented features' MiniSquishy provides. There actually was a message about it, but if you missed it, it WOULD come as a right surprise...

I'm still in the dark as to why Mark created this feature(?) in the first place. What was it suppose to accomplish?

Also, I'm not sure why the CR4 editor wants to use my clipboard. Any comments? Any answers?

If memory serves, it was supposed to make things simpler. Not in the sense of 'idiotic', in the sense of 'easier'. Doesn't seem to have worked out as planned, though... As to the clipboard, not a clue. Actually, I seem to have had less difficulty adapting to it tham most, which strikes me as odd. Maybe because I've been here only since, what, October, and hadn't gotten into the 'habits' as thoroughly. (shrug)

Sorry, that was probably a teeny bit less than a "good-worthy-4" answer. The "highlight" is in fact still there before starting typing. To see, simply refresh page when in message composition mode. When the first input/stroke is made (to place cursor) inside the message box (i.e., when author has thus committed to standard character set/font), it's then that the font-attribution (and link attribution) tools fade—that some buttons are "turned off"—because they're not in use—and having them in use would be...detrimental to program flow. (More about this aspect later.)

Seen at its most superficial, the font attribution "tools" are simply not there (not bold in top layer) when they are not needed or are not (already) in use. When strings are selected/invert-highlighted, that would be seen as the time when font editing capabilities are needed (to become available). (However, writer selection of a string is not the only option for using the font-edit tools--that explanation will have to come later, as well.)

Now, the above is in regard specifically to the font attribute editing buttons (more specifically, toggles, but...not...now). Buttons in positions 1 - 4 and positions 11 & 12 are the ones for font-attribute editing. (By way of contrast, the Omega tool (which does not dim) opens a supplemental, non-standard character set—it does not entail character font attribution—but font attribution can be applied to [or turned on for input-ing] the Omega character set characters.)

Positions 5 & 6 buttons, while not "editing" tools in the strictest sense, share operational similarity with the font editing buttons, hence give the same appearances during message composition sessions.

If the original, and succeeding inquiries (explicit or implicit) could be characterized in one way it might be: Why don't some of the buttons in the CR4 "message editor" tool bar give the same superficial appearance as tool bar buttons in a word processor? To some degree such an observation is factual, in some ways not—indeed, there are some buttons which are (likewise) only conditionally present (viewable at top layer) in word processors (they are otherwise not even visible as dimmed characters); it's only that their absence at other times escapes our notice. (Does this statement give a clue as to why the CR4 font attribute tools are dimmed when not in use? Yes, it's so that writers will know that they are available, even if not currently in use!)

Since I'm rushed for time right now, I will be back later to try to give more in-depth insights. This will hopefully clear up in more (including programmatic) detail the questions in original post-er's mind...and demonstrate that the CR4 feature augmentation is not a...step backward. (Also, there's another, very positive new benefit included in the CR4 update that I think I remember seeing; but I want to test again to be sure before publishing.)

CA

Type, type, type, _type - damn! I wanted that bit in bold strike-through subscript - but I couldn't do it without going back to highlight it and then apply the attributes.

"...detrimental to program flow"

I feel it spoils the flow of input to have to go back like this - especially for entering expressions

(eg: a₄x³ + a₃x² + a₂x + a₁ = 0)

- unless you have some other cunning plan to circumvent (what I consider to be) this gross inconvenience? (And BTW, this ain't a program - it's a comment.)

Thing about toolbar buttons is that you don't have to use them. If they don't work (ie they're greyed out), they might as well not be there. Take your point about letting User know they're available (if he pulls the right strings) - but what's the harm in having them available all the time?

Rant, rant, rant .

_{type ^type}type no more. John, how did I do that without preselecting any of the string? Simply, when the message page first opened I clicked first, not on the page but, on all the needed buttons in the tool bar. Next I began typing on the page and, because the font format change buttons were activated, the text appeared just as you see it. I even changed fonts just before adding the string, "type no more". Again, the buttons stayed active. Right now, evidently because I changed fonts right in the middle of applying fonts, typing right afterwards on this page did not make the buttons go dim. Instead, the buttons now appear with outlines, just like in MS Word. If I now click left mouse button (right here on the page), I expect that the button outlines will disappear and the buttons will become faded--because of toggling effect of script function. ...Sure enough, that's exactly what happened.

I'm not sure but, if you copy this message onto a Reply page and move cursor through it you might see some of these changes to the tool bar. (Remember to click browser Back, and not Submit, when you finish.)

New tool bar Demo. To view,

Select and Copy this post, click Reply button, and paste into message writing box. Then, starting at asterisks below, read as you tap keyboard arrow key to move cursor (left to right) through text. Observe what happens in tool bar. (When finished, use browser "Back" control to close window.)

*** Selecting a text string causes all _font ^edit tool tools to be active. Not much different in appearance than Microsoft Word, is it? In Word, activated font attribute tool buttons are shown as outlined buttons. In CR4, inactive tool bar status is shown as shaded buttons. Shading of subscript, superscript, and strikethrough buttons in CR4 Tool Bar corresponds to check marks in Word's Format>Font>Effects submenu.

When cursor and font-attribute-edited text coincide the applicable font edit tool ^is not _activated

Placing the cursor on standard font text makes font edit tools inactive

If cursor is over a string with one special font attribute, other attribute tools are inactive and faded.

Bold Non-bold Italic type Roman type Underscore Non-underscore Strike-through Non-strike-through ^Superscript Non-superscript _Subscript Non-subscript

Now you see how the font edit tools work. I am informed that operation of the font attribute tools is based on running of scripts that were included in the code improvements.

Please note: Horizontal line tool doesn't appear in regular forum toolbar.

If you see horizontal line above this sentence, you are (or would be) posting in a blog forum.

(As I test this in the post composition window, the horizontal line shows. Unless I'm mistaken, it will disappear (be filtered out) when I click to review (and post) this message.) (Aha! Just learned something new. The horizontal bar does still appear. This means that it can be used in regular posts...by writing the post, offline, using a word processor and then posting to the online forum. In CR4, however, the horizontal line tool is only available in blog forum message edit tool bars.) (There are other toolbar features also exclusive only to blog forums.)

My next post tells about the one particular—great—feature improvement I mentioned, in closing, two posts above. And another, lost feature that I think is a disimprovement. John, are you watching all this?

First, sorry about forgetting to log in for previous post.

Now about that "best feature" I mentioned earlier. If you ever compose messages offline and then paste into a board forum, you might find this quite useful—John, I hope you're reading this. Before the recent change it was possible to post an offline-created message to CR4, but any special font attributes that were applied using the word processor would not be applied on the forum; once the review button was invoked, any special font formatting would disappear...and would have to be "reconstituted" using the tools available in the CR4 tool bar. (If the CR4 tool bar didn't have it, you were out of luck.) Now you can "create" just about any kind of font attribute effects offline and they will be "accepted for Review and publication Submission" on CR4. John, this means that if you want to easily apply numerous font attributes it might be easiest to open your word processor, create your post there (with complex strings as per your example), and then paste it from your clip board into the forum.

Now about the "anti-progressive," present non-feature I mentioned. Before the new features were coded in, ...the keyboard shortcuts were available (in this box) for applying font attributes on the boards. For example, Ctrl-B on the keyboard would invoke Bolding of subsequently typed text on the message composition "sheet" in CR4. Similarly, Italic and Underscore type could be applied using Ctrl-I and Ctrl-U. Unfortunately, this capability appears no longer to be available. Evidently it's a case of trade-off: greater number and diversity of format features in exchange for lessened ease of applying the most commonly used special font-format attributes.

I, too, hope someone—especially John—finds all of this to be useful—if not now, then eventually.

CA

Re: your #12.

"Not much different in appearance than Microsoft Word, is it?"

Not in appearance, but in function. In Word, the buttons are available (like the sadly-missed ctrl-b, i & u) before you type or select text.

---

Re: your #13.

I agree it's good to be able to import text without having to re-format - but why could this not have been added anyway? Also, I very seldom compose off-line - the only reason I'd want to now (excepting maybe for one post in 500) would be to avail myself of the more natural formatting capabilities of a.n. other editor.

---

Re: your #14.

The ability to preset effects at the start of a comment would have been no help whatsoever in my #9 or #10.

---

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on this. As far as I'm concerned, the benefits of the changes are outweighed by the loss of ability to preset attributes/effects while typing. Call me a Luddite, but I'd rather have it back the way it was.

Oops, Did it again.

Hmm. Now it's got me wondering...about...well...never mind for now. I'll just wait to see what happens.

CA (with avatar)

Nope. Help wouldn't have been much help. Mark? Maybe a tag in the help menu? To keep it very simple?

(Whine ...) yea, ok, we've got ctrl key functionality back - but at what a loss??? (Brownie point for discovering it anyway.)

[BTW - if any of the Team are listening in: how about an UNDO button (for when dumbos like me spend three weeks composing a perfect post, highlight it to do some fancy font-work, then accidentally hit the space bar)?]

At what a loss?! Surely you jest! You will have all of the previous functionality you longed for and, I might add, with a significant improvement: not having the redundancy of functionality—keyboard short cut and tool bar tools--to have to contend with. (As I see it, once you become accustomed, the Ctrl key shortcut is both fluid-er and faster, and you don't have wasted effort and time picking up the mouse.)

Spending three weeks writing a post online? ...well, any post that long seems from this perspective to provide all the good excuse needed for doing the writing offline, where Undo—and Undo in Word is no less than superlative—is always available.

Speaking of those occasional inadvertent inputs (of space bar and such) and the devastation that can result— I, myself, am certainly no stranger! Over time I've learned to try to stay calm, pause, collect, and then look for ways (backspace or scroll, for example) to extricate...back to where.... (because, I find, it's often the next move after the wrong move that is the fatal move). When that doesn't work...well, there is one feature upgrade (or would it be down-/damn-grade) I've long wished for. It would be that, when any amount of earnest work is lost or stolen away unexpectedly, I would be able to tap an easily remembered (mnemonic) key sequence on my keyboard. At that point the computer's sound card and speakers would cut loose—in its own voice naturally—in a ceaseless frenzy of swearings, unseemly utterances, plaintive protestations, scatological references, holy oaths, and so on and so forth until...until squelched by a "strike any key" command. That way, it wouldn't be me needing to account to my wife; or me living thereafter in fear of being held up to public ridicule, before friends and family, for letting the machine get the better of me, when least expecting.

Maybe the Team knows where I can get such a program.

CA

"10. ..... Please note: Font and Hyperlink attribute editing by pre-selection of character strings will not be available in the Custom-Menu-Bypassed editing mode."

That loss.

"..not having the (redundancy of) functionality—keyboard short cut and tool bar tools.." (my parenthesis added).

And that loss.

Let's face it - as I previously stated - we ain't going to agree on this. I like it the way it was. New features (without taking the old stuff away) - great.

Let the last word be the last word on the matter:

" - we ain't going to agree on this."

Let it by others be thought in reply but not said: Let any man able to take neither Yes nor No for an answer speak only for himself.

comfort space_{for the intrepid}

Hi John

I've got to be honest: a long discussion about how things should work and why they were better before is a lot harder for me (aka the programmer) to act on; if you have a specific example of a problem then post it as a new thread to CR4 Feedback and I will see it; this will really increase your chances of getting some resolution. (When a thread like this one wanders away from the original question then I may unsubscribe... I have to much work to do to listen in on everything.)

But here's my real question: What browser do you use, and on what OS? Browser differences prevent some things for working the way I'd like, and OS differences are effectively impossible for me to test... either one of these could be why you are seeing things you don't like, and the right work-around may depend on what browser/OS you are using.

Re undo, you should be able to use your browser's Edit menu and "hot key" to get to Undo... this is not lost functionality. (In IE the Undo/Redo/Copy/Paste menu items are in the right-click menu; FireFox doesn't allow me to include those features for security reasons, but the Windows copy/paste/undo/redo hotkeys work.)

Re why make the change to the right-click menu at all, I am hoping to add more features to the editor and that is where they will need to go. I released this "minimal" version so we could iron out any wrinkles. If you think there are some things that should go in the current one right now then suggest them (but undo/redo/copy/paste are done as well as they can be). I any case I would appreciate it (and you will be better served) if you started a new thread to focus on what you think are the one or two most important things.

Thanks
- Mark

Hi, Mark,

I've just been trying the right-click menu - Lo, and behold, I can UNDO (as long as I get in quick; as I think Cowanon indicated in another post).

Thanks, John.

Correction: when guest said shaded, he meant to say faded.

Thanks,

A good answer to ya!

Yes! I have a problem typing on here! I'm using a Mac and when I type on here and use the Return key it doesn't give me a new paragraph but just carries on as if I hadn't hit Return so it makes for difficult reading on a long post.

Could be way off but, ....hard to see how Apple Corp. could be the problem. Seems to me that somehow, and for some (possibly good) reason, that particular key assignment on your keyboard (and possible others) is being changed - this, assuming the Enter key functions nominally (as "carriage return and line feed") when used "off-line." My guess is, it's a setting(s) problem--possibly a browser or OS settings problem--and the Enter key has been set (by computer seller, reseller, or previous owner) to be disabled inside of Web windows. Another possibility - I'm only conjecturing out of semi-ignorance here - could be the mouse settings, either in the proprietary or in the Mac OS generic-mouse application: a setting that disables the Enter key in Web windows or otherwise gives preference to the mouse left button.

What could be the advantage (the possible good mentioned above) of "comatizing" the Enter key in Web windows? Not infrequently - and this seems to derive from (what I view as) faulty Web Site page and page mask design (by two-finger "peck typists" who have no historic awareness of "touch typing") - inputting Enter (key) (in particular, and Tab and other keys as well) will have unintended consequences inside Web windows. For example: Instead of starting a new paragraph in a Web-page-form's text entry box, the (keyed) Enter (Carriage Return) command causes the page (and user-input information) to be submitted...with incomplete &or erroneous information. Killing Enter key online will prevent this from happening (only the mouse can "submit" pages with user keyed data)...and eliminates the Enter key (et al) as a nuisance factor.

So check back to the source (where you got the machine) for possible solution; or Apple; or...

Copy and post your problem again, as an "Ask a Question," in the CR4 Software and Programming section. (Let true experts help you to track the solution down.)

Here is more information for JohnDG and others about using the Custom menu tool bar. It's about a way to use hot keys when using the newer tool bar. Normally you have to select/highlight already-keyed text in order to activate the font-/link-attribute editing tools in the editing tool bar; using hot keys is not immediately available. However, if you use standard keyboard sequences to select/highlight text, then the tools activate just as if selected with by dragging cursor. Once the tools are highlighted, then it's possible to use hot keys (bold, italic, underscore) to make the font changes without picking up and clicking with the mouse. Likewise, the tools can be turned off and the text reverted back to normal (non-bold, Roman, non-underscore). For example, I will start with cursor at end of this sentence, hold shift key and tap/hold back-arrow key to highlight this sentence; then key Ctrl-U, followed by Ctrl-B, followed by Ctrl-I to underscore, embolden, and italicize this sentence...here goes. When I made the change, I used the fwd arrow to move the cursor to "here" right after the ellipsis. At that point I held Shift and used forward arrow to re-highlight "here goes." Then, Ctrl-B, followed by Ctrl-I, followed by Ctrl-U was all that was needed to remove the special font attributes. The same approach (shift-arrow highlighting) will work for the strike out, sub/superscript, and link attributes but, since I don't know any hot keys for these (anyone?) I would have to use the menu bar tools to make those font attribute changes. Hope this pointer is useful to anyone who doesn't want to revert back to "classic" (pre-custom) tool bar using the right click menu. I realize it's not quite the same as setting attributes in advance of typing (the pre custom/classic tool bar is required to do that), but it's very convenient for making font attribute changes immediately after a word is typed, which is the way many people make such font changes anyway; and it's exactly how special text attributes are made when writing longhand (meaning, a word is written first then immediately underlined or double underlined to indicate bold, italics or underscore).

So I think it might be possible that with a bit of getting used to it, people are going to find the problems are more with getting accustomed to the new tool bar's advantages, and finding ways to exploit them.

ca

I'm sorry, but regarding any of this as problematic loses me completely. Quite frankly, I can't tell enough of a difference to figure out what your explanation even means (nothing, to me, I guess). Although I do concur that this version more closely mimics longhand writing methods, but then you speak of 'advantages', and I'm lost again. WHAT advantages? Should I even give a good sharp rap? Just ranting over the confusion; me, I'm perfectly happy, otherwise... It's just as if I HAD good sense...

Your comment appears to contain several questions (some seemingly waiting to be inferred from statements), but I will only try to answer the explicit one which is also non-rhetorical.

What I spoke of, actually, were "the new tool bar's" advantages—that as opposed to the old, the classic, the pre-"Custom"-menu tool bar's advantages.

That aside....not only longhand writing is mimicked, but also (here's another fading concept from the past)...also typewriting: as in typewriting for submission to editing (after which...galley proofing and, finally, publication)! The idea here, with the Custom editing tool bar, is that even as keying (typing) progresses, and even as a particular word has just been typed, any necessary (writer's) enhancement of any particular word is immediately available...by simply holding Shift and back-arrowing over letters, or by holding Ctrl-Shift and back-arrowing over words. A few quick strokes (no reaching, mousing around to find a spot, clicking/dragging, reaching again...) and the word enhancement is done (in three strokes)...and on with typing the rest of the story, all with fingers never leaving the keys. Naturally, such a writer already knows the three standard text enhancements (bold, italic, underscore) he might need to convey to editor (hence the tools are visible but not active until activated).

But what of the editor (or self editor) to whom the draft copy is submitted? How does the new edit tool bar in turn help the editor (or self editor) prepare the draft for the galley proof typesetter (or self-proofing) before publication? Now we see the significance of also having mouse-drag selection to activate the Custom tool bar! Since the editor (working on others' or his own, already created, draft) is not primarily involved in writing (typing) but, rather, is just reading, marking, and inserting, his blue pencil (his blue mouse, so to speak) is the implement he far more often needs; Ctrl-key sequences used previously by the writer are of practically no use for editing (in the real sense of editing). Thus, had you submitted your last post to an editor...

Although I do concur that this can see that using the newer-version tool bar more closely mimics resembles hard-copy, including longhand pen & paper, writing methods,. bBut twhen you speak of 'advantages', and I'm lost again—I fail to see the significance.

...is how he might have altered it...using mouse only, and keys (but no Ctrl-/Shift-key sequences) for insertions only where needed. Do you begin to see now?

What is more, the evolutionary connection of the updated tool bar to former work regimes goes beyond the mere task context of manuscript writing/editing (or of reviewing, censoring, redacting, etc.)—

Thinking again of the typist writer originating hard copy (before the advent of software controlled text processing), advanced office typewriters, including IBM Selectrics, provided a facility whereby, in order to correct typo's, the typist needed only to backspace (either single tap for a letter or key held for multiple letters), tap to raise the white-over ribbon, re-type the typos, backspace again, and then continue typing without typo's. When "electronic" typewriters with memory appeared, all these keystrokes were reduced to a single, "correction" key stroke: the typist needed only to wait while the typewriter did the backspacing and over typing, then positioned the carriage or print ball and signalled for fingers to begin again. In similar fashion the Electronic's could even automate the process of adding underscore and boldface. (Italics would have to wait for the daisy wheel...but single underscore had always been the cue that Italic type was to be set.) Are you now seeing any significance in how, and why, the Shift-/Ctrl-key sequences and editing on the fly, as facilitated by the custom tool bar, actually originated?

I do hope this makes for greater happiness, if not less confusion.

CA

Well, sure, but my point was that I did not have any problems (before OR now), and all is well. Already happy, but your answer is welcome, and may help others sufficiently that I rated it a 'GA' on their behalf!