* Possible FH bug
Possible FH bug
I am still learning about FH and the best way to use it but I think I may have noticed a small bug so was hoping others could confirm my finding. It is only a minor thing regarding the addition of a new parent.
I have noticed several methods of adding a new parent:
1. The "Add/Parent" option from the main menu
2. Add Father or Add Mother from the Focus window
3. Use of the "UP" arrow from the Properties box to open the "Add Parent" dialog
There may be other methods I have not yet discovered.
In methods 1. and 2. above, the Project box clears for the entry of a new individual with the Name: field highlighted and the cursor placed in that field ready to start typing.
Method 3. does not do that. It creates a new empty property box but the Name: field is not highlighted and the cursor is not shown.
Using Method 3. the user has to click in a field before data can be entered.
I was wondering if this was intentional behaviour with FH or maybe it is a minor bug.
I have noticed several methods of adding a new parent:
1. The "Add/Parent" option from the main menu
2. Add Father or Add Mother from the Focus window
3. Use of the "UP" arrow from the Properties box to open the "Add Parent" dialog
There may be other methods I have not yet discovered.
In methods 1. and 2. above, the Project box clears for the entry of a new individual with the Name: field highlighted and the cursor placed in that field ready to start typing.
Method 3. does not do that. It creates a new empty property box but the Name: field is not highlighted and the cursor is not shown.
Using Method 3. the user has to click in a field before data can be entered.
I was wondering if this was intentional behaviour with FH or maybe it is a minor bug.
- LornaCraig
- Megastar
- Posts: 3190
- Joined: 11 Jan 2005 17:36
- Family Historian: V7
- Location: Oxfordshire, UK
Re: Possible FH bug
I find that with method 3 the name field is not highlighted (i.e. not surrounded by a thick border) but the cursor is still placed in that field ready for data entry, so it makes no difference to the user. Are you sure the cursor is not visible?
By the way, there are indeed other ways of adding a parent. For example using diagram-based editing (the click-and-drag method) which, like methods 1 to 3, opens a new Property Box. Another method is to expand the record in the Records window or the All tab of the Property Box and right-click on the name, then select Add Family (as Child) > Link to new Family Record. (This last method does not open a new Property Box).
By the way, there are indeed other ways of adding a parent. For example using diagram-based editing (the click-and-drag method) which, like methods 1 to 3, opens a new Property Box. Another method is to expand the record in the Records window or the All tab of the Property Box and right-click on the name, then select Add Family (as Child) > Link to new Family Record. (This last method does not open a new Property Box).
Lorna
Re: Possible FH bug
Just tried again, method 3 creates an empty property window but there is no highlighting of the Name: field nor is the cursor visible in any of the fields.
In fact if I try typing then I hear an audible error sound which I suppose is telling me there is no window or field in focus for me to use.
If I manually click into any filed then I can carry on entering data as normal.
This looks to me like a little programming omission in not setting the focus to the window/field ready for the user to begin typing.
In fact if I try typing then I hear an audible error sound which I suppose is telling me there is no window or field in focus for me to use.
If I manually click into any filed then I can carry on entering data as normal.
This looks to me like a little programming omission in not setting the focus to the window/field ready for the user to begin typing.
Re: Possible FH bug
For me the Cursor is present in the name field when using your 'method 3' so perhaps a visibility/display font/screen issue (i.e. hardware/system related).
Mervyn
Mervyn
Re: Possible FH bug
Perhaps it is just me then.
I have customised the property box quite a bit so maybe I have caused this behaviour.
I am reluctant to reset the property box to its default settings (and lose all of my customisation) unless I can save those settings and restore them later.
Is it possible to do a restore of saved settings for just one aspect of FH?
I have customised the property box quite a bit so maybe I have caused this behaviour.
I am reluctant to reset the property box to its default settings (and lose all of my customisation) unless I can save those settings and restore them later.
Is it possible to do a restore of saved settings for just one aspect of FH?
- tatewise
- Megastar
- Posts: 28341
- Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
- Family Historian: V7
- Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
- Contact:
Re: Possible FH bug
Yes, for Property Box customisations via the Menu > Customize Data Entry use More Tab Tasks > Export/Import Tab.
For many other customisations see File > Import/Export > ...
See how_to:move_settings|> Move Family Historian Settings and Projects.
For many other customisations see File > Import/Export > ...
See how_to:move_settings|> Move Family Historian Settings and Projects.
Mike Tate ~ researching the Tate and Scott family history ~ tatewise ancestry
Re: Possible FH bug
Thanks Mike for that.
I saved my customisations and reset the property box to its default setting and now adding a new parent using method 3. from above does show the cursor in the Name: field as others have witnessed.
I restored my customisations and it again fails to position the cursor.
At least I know it is not a program error, just a quirk of my customisation in adding extra facts into the dialog.
I saved my customisations and reset the property box to its default setting and now adding a new parent using method 3. from above does show the cursor in the Name: field as others have witnessed.
I restored my customisations and it again fails to position the cursor.
At least I know it is not a program error, just a quirk of my customisation in adding extra facts into the dialog.
Re: Possible FH bug
I have had a little more experimentation with my customisation of the property box and realised what had caused the little hiccup,
I had added "Living & Private" flags as the first item in the property box, above the Name: field. It seems obvious now that the program couldn't place the cursor in the first field because it wasn't a text box.
I moved the Name: field back up to be the first in the list and the cursor now shows as expected.
Something to bear in mind when customising!
I had added "Living & Private" flags as the first item in the property box, above the Name: field. It seems obvious now that the program couldn't place the cursor in the first field because it wasn't a text box.
I moved the Name: field back up to be the first in the list and the cursor now shows as expected.
Something to bear in mind when customising!
Re: Possible FH bug
I have noticed a similar situation. I have placed a Custom ID field above name. When I add a new individual one way, the cursor is placed in Name field, do it another way and cursor is in Custom ID field. Your comments explains why Very annoying when you start typing without looking at the screen, only to realise you’ve begun entering their name in the Custom ID field in error! - aargh
I think this is a minor bug, in that cursor should be in same field either way, not just the first field. I know we have customized the layout, but surely no one will have removed the name field, so I see no reason not to be consistent and always place cursor in name field?
I think this is a minor bug, in that cursor should be in same field either way, not just the first field. I know we have customized the layout, but surely no one will have removed the name field, so I see no reason not to be consistent and always place cursor in name field?
Mike Loney
Website http://www.loney.tribalpages.com
http://www.mickloney.tribalpages.com
Website http://www.loney.tribalpages.com
http://www.mickloney.tribalpages.com
Re: Possible FH bug
That sounds like the programming is designed so that the cursor settles on the first field, which for the vast majority of users will always be the name field. You have apparently upset that programming by replacing that first filed with your CustomID field.
Sorry but I think you may have to ask yourself first whether the 'bug' is caused by the software or by the user, and who needs to make some change. No software producer can possibly respond to everyone's needs/preferences so there are always compromises to be made.
Mervyn
Sorry but I think you may have to ask yourself first whether the 'bug' is caused by the software or by the user, and who needs to make some change. No software producer can possibly respond to everyone's needs/preferences so there are always compromises to be made.
Mervyn
- tatewise
- Megastar
- Posts: 28341
- Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
- Family Historian: V7
- Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
- Contact:
Re: Possible FH bug
It is a bug - no question.
When methods 1 and 2 are used, FH copes with customisations and correctly focusses on the Name field.
That solution simply needs to be applied to method 3 and any other methods that need it.
(I suspect they overlooked adjusting the method 3 software when Property Box customisation was added.)
Please report it to Calico Pie using how_to:about#problem_reporting|> Problem Reporting.
When methods 1 and 2 are used, FH copes with customisations and correctly focusses on the Name field.
That solution simply needs to be applied to method 3 and any other methods that need it.
(I suspect they overlooked adjusting the method 3 software when Property Box customisation was added.)
Please report it to Calico Pie using how_to:about#problem_reporting|> Problem Reporting.
Mike Tate ~ researching the Tate and Scott family history ~ tatewise ancestry
Re: Possible FH bug
Mervyn,
I tend to agree, but it would suit everyone if they went to name, rather than first field, and which would be very simple to programme!. I’m more annoyed about the lack of consistency.
I tend to agree, but it would suit everyone if they went to name, rather than first field, and which would be very simple to programme!. I’m more annoyed about the lack of consistency.
Mike Loney
Website http://www.loney.tribalpages.com
http://www.mickloney.tribalpages.com
Website http://www.loney.tribalpages.com
http://www.mickloney.tribalpages.com
- tatewise
- Megastar
- Posts: 28341
- Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
- Family Historian: V7
- Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
- Contact:
Re: Possible FH bug
Consistency is my point, and why it IS a bug, as I just said.
Mike Tate ~ researching the Tate and Scott family history ~ tatewise ancestry
Re: Possible FH bug
New support ticket opened at Calico Pie