My V4 Update CD arrived today and so far I'm very pleased with the many improvements (and cannot yet find any upside-down text even at 32-bit resolution). However, a minor but annoying bug first reported 31/03/06 for V3.0 has still not been fixed. Please see my post of 02/05/07 for V3.1.2 at http://www.fhug.org.uk/cgi-bin/index.cg ... y&num=2319
But I expect Simon will concentrate on more important matters such as correcting the website creation bug.
ID:3678
* Family Property Facts Sentence Bug Unfixed
-
nsw
Family Property Facts Sentence Bug Unfixed
Peter
If I look at a family record it says:
{individual} married {spouse/her/him} {date} {place}
I'm not looking at an individual I'm looking at a family so which individual do you want it to display? I suspect rather than cause confusion by choosing one of the people ('at random' so to speak), it chooses just to show the template. You can see how it will look by choosing one of the individuals who are part of the marriage and viewing the fact there.
If I look at a family record it says:
{individual} married {spouse/her/him} {date} {place}
I'm not looking at an individual I'm looking at a family so which individual do you want it to display? I suspect rather than cause confusion by choosing one of the people ('at random' so to speak), it chooses just to show the template. You can see how it will look by choosing one of the individuals who are part of the marriage and viewing the fact there.
Family Property Facts Sentence Bug Unfixed
The marriage template for a family is wrong. It should not use {individual} but {couple} instead.
However the bug still exists since the template for divorce is '{couple} were divorced {date} {place}' and this is always displayed as the template and never as the sentence.
So I would consider this (admittedly minor) bug to still exist - 3 years after it was first reported. I thought it was only Microsoft who didn't fix bugs! There are minor bugs and there are minor bugs, some are hard to fix and other simple. In my personal opinion this should be a simple one to fix.
Does Simon use a bug tracking system? I get the feeling that he doesn't as I don't get any acknowledgements not even with a tracking number when I report a bug. No What's New note in the help details any bug fixes which also leads to my impression that no tracking system is used. I would love to be told that I am wrong.
It is not commercial suicide to report bugs fixed, all software has bugs, it is being considerate to your users to let them know that something has been fixed. And having a bug tracking system means that users can easily find out if what they are doing is due to a bug or due to their mistake.
However the bug still exists since the template for divorce is '{couple} were divorced {date} {place}' and this is always displayed as the template and never as the sentence.
So I would consider this (admittedly minor) bug to still exist - 3 years after it was first reported. I thought it was only Microsoft who didn't fix bugs! There are minor bugs and there are minor bugs, some are hard to fix and other simple. In my personal opinion this should be a simple one to fix.
Does Simon use a bug tracking system? I get the feeling that he doesn't as I don't get any acknowledgements not even with a tracking number when I report a bug. No What's New note in the help details any bug fixes which also leads to my impression that no tracking system is used. I would love to be told that I am wrong.
It is not commercial suicide to report bugs fixed, all software has bugs, it is being considerate to your users to let them know that something has been fixed. And having a bug tracking system means that users can easily find out if what they are doing is due to a bug or due to their mistake.
-
PeterR
- Megastar
- Posts: 1129
- Joined: 10 Jul 2006 16:55
- Family Historian: V7
- Location: Northumberland, UK
Family Property Facts Sentence Bug Unfixed
Nick,
Thanks, and of course what you say is true for that parrticular 'individual' fact. But there are several other 'family' facts (which is the relevant context), e.g. co-residence, which includes '{couple}' rather than '{individual}' and birth of child, which includes a non-ambiguous '{individual}'. I think it would be helpful, as well as consistent with the behaviour of the corresponding individual sentence box, for such sentences to be translated. If the behaviour is intended to differ, should the difference not be documented?
Thanks, and of course what you say is true for that parrticular 'individual' fact. But there are several other 'family' facts (which is the relevant context), e.g. co-residence, which includes '{couple}' rather than '{individual}' and birth of child, which includes a non-ambiguous '{individual}'. I think it would be helpful, as well as consistent with the behaviour of the corresponding individual sentence box, for such sentences to be translated. If the behaviour is intended to differ, should the difference not be documented?
-
PeterR
- Megastar
- Posts: 1129
- Joined: 10 Jul 2006 16:55
- Family Historian: V7
- Location: Northumberland, UK
Family Property Facts Sentence Bug Unfixed
[smile] Fixed in 4.0.1. Many thanks, Simon. [smile]