Compiling puzzle!

Scrivener
,
1

I have a real puzzle. I have one project—only one—which, when compiled, the resulting document shows the binder code of each of the Scrivener binder documents as well as the text.

I compile with my standard .RTF compile format or my standard MMD→HTML format, which I use for all my projects, and the codes appear in both types of exported document. None of my other projects behave like this.

I have searched and searched in Project Settings… and Preferences, and have gone through every menu closely but cannot find anywhere that would account for this. So if anyone can work it out, I’d be interested to know. Deleting the codes in the output document is not a big deal, but it strikes me that if we knew what I’ve done, being able to compile with the codes exposed would help those people that post here about having lost (a) binder document(s) in trying to track them down in the project package.

Anyway, here’s a zipped, small redacted section of a compiled document.

random.rtf.zip (2.8 KB)

This is my M1 MBA, though it’s the same with the Intel iMac, and has been true for as long as I can remember… at least through Big Sur, Catalina and Ventura and the various Scrivener updates.

:smile:

Mark

2

You have at some point ticked the Insert links back to Scrivener in each section option, in the General Options compile tab, along with the subsidiary option, Insert unique document identifiers only. This latter option will be parsed by Scrivener if you drop the RTF back into the binder it came from, converting the codes into internal links. Useful for intake of proofing notes from a reader, in cases where you aren’t sure if the the proofreaders will all be using software that preserves Scrivener’s external hyperlinks (which the first option provides).

1 Like
3

Thanks. That’s the one place I missed. I don’t know when or why I must have ticked those options… I think I experimented with Sync with External Folder a couple of years back, but didn’t pursue it as, for me, it was more trouble than it was worth. I guess I might have ticked them then.

So thanks. But ticking them and compiling could well be of use for people trying to identify a problematic binder document, through eliminating those it can’t be.

:smile:

Mark

1 Like
4

What is “binder code”?

5

If you look at the RTF I attached, you’ll see what I mean.

:smile:

Mark