As a wine drinker I completely agree- even if the actions under the hood (bonnet?) are different, it makes more sense to have identical close boxes.
The actions are actually quite different; we have had this discussion before, and I am afraid (actually, I am happy, because I like the current way things work) that the answer is still “no”, and is unlikely to change. Now I wonder how many other ways you can think of to ask me the same thing?
All the best, hope you are enjoying the whiskey!
Lol - I like the drunken Maria posting. There are programming constraints, too, yes, that make it a little hard. Honestly, this is the sort of thing I’ll consider reconsidering ( ) when I come to look at 2.0 - but until then, having one document take precedence over the other is how 1.x was designed.
All the best,
P.S. I have a feeling that those two heads of yours (the beer drinking head and the whiskey drinking head) are going to combine into one very sore head in the morning!
Luckily, after 3 days of skiing in a 50 centimeter snowstorm and 3 evenings of cognac, espresso and vitamin C - I am a broken shell of a man with absolutely no desire to argue any point.
Now I know what to get you for your birthday.
All I want for my birthday is Scrivener links in the notes field. But tint Icons with label color was gift enough.
Sorry to flog a dead horse, but as a relative newcomer to Scrivener, this has caused me some confusion. So I went back and read the forum arguments on both sides, and I have to admit I am still confused.
IMO the concept of a “primary” and a “supporting” document is not very clear. I do all my writing in the top pane, because my hands cover part of the bottom pane when typing on my Powerbook. I don’t see any reason why I shouldn’t.
In fact, even the Scrivener help file is unclear on this, labelling the top pane “Editor pane 1” and the bottom one “Editor pane 2”. The accompanying text says “Scrivener has two identical editor panes…” And that’s the way I would prefer to look at them; as two identical panes which I can put to any use I see fit. To me, that’s the beauty of Scrivener – it adapts to my way of working.
And so, I will happily continue typing in the top pane, and Keith can do nothing to stop me!
I’m a top pane typer too â€” also because I do most of my work on my PowerBook. My only confusion initially was the issue of which pane remained open when I closed one. For the first several days, it was always a shock to me that the bottom pane was the dominant one, even though I had been working on the top one.
In the end though, it was never a big issue really. In fact, I find one of the pleasures of Scrivener is the ability to easily find your way home again on those occasions when you got lost navigating about.
It really only becomes an issue if you open and close splits a lot. If you always have them open, which is which really doesn’t matter. For reference: In horizontal mode, the bottom is the primary split, and the upper is the alternate. This likely comes from the common cascading design found in 3-pane applications, such as Mail. There you have a bird’s eye list browser on the left, which when clicked brings up contents in the upper split, and then clicking on a document in the upper split loads the content in the lower split. Scrivener isn’t really a 3-pane editor, (though it can be set up to perfectly emulate one) but since this cascading model is so common, a lot of people think in such terms. Some do not.
Vertical splits are arranged on the left to right tendency that is common amongst speakers of languages that run that way. The primary split is the left one, and the alternate split is the right one.
Now, ergonomically speaking – especially on laptops – the top split would be a much better placement for the primary. Hand obstruction is one issue, but even for people with small hands, having constant content towards the top of the screen means less head tilt, and thus less neck strain. But, as I said, if you leave splits open all of the time, you can work as though the top were the primary (pretty much).
Amber, isn’t it rather early for you! Or is it that it’s rather late?
AmberV and tim, you are quite right. It is hardly an issue at all, and it doesn’t really affect my workflow.
But it did cause some confusion, and even after having the distinction between primary/secondary explained to me, its usefulness still eludes me…
For the record, I think 1.01 is a fantastic product, easily the best writing software I have ever used. I would not hesitate to buy it even if development stopped tomorrow.
Oh me, I hardly ever sleep. I’m one of those.
Well, I drink beer nor wine, whiskey, et al (alcohol gives me migraines ), so I don’t care either way! I’ve gotten used to the whole top pane/bottom pane (and it wasn’t easy, I tell you! ) and if it had a close box instead, cool. Whatever, man…(now pass the green tea)…
Call me a tard (Go ahead Keith!), but I still don’t get the distinction between primary and secondary panes. I accept it, but I don’t get it.
This won’t change any time soon. There are technical reasons and, as has been commented, it is not a big deal anyway. You are right that I should have elaborated more in the Help file, though, and that calling the top one Editor Pane 1 was probably a mistake (sort of).
All the best,
No worries. As i said I do accept it. And i suspect one of these days I will get it. Just a conceptual thing that doesn’t affect how I work in any case.
Sorry to hear you’re having a bad one.