Missing Highlights in compiling Scrivener for Windows 3

Small problem. When I compile, the highlights in my text do not compile although the ones in my footnotes do.

I have tried checking and unchecking the “Remove Highlighting” check box and I have tried it in RTF, .doc and .docx formats with no difference.

Any thoughts?

Do you override formatting in your section layouts?

I’ll check that out. I just noted one very tiny two word sentence that actually is highlighted and note that it is the only one in the document that’s marked “No Style”. I’m a heavy styles user and everything else has it. I think I just need to figure out how to not have a style wipe out the highlighting on compile.

Styles are the problem, then. There’s a bug in the Windows version affecting character and ¶a styles; it overrides italics, bold, and (I suppose) highlighting. I suppose they’re working on it.

They don’t recommend using styles for most things. I have a style for italics and a few other uses, but 99% of the text is No Style.

I guess I’ve just had too many years working with Word. My world revolves around styles which makes so much so simple and consistent. I’ll play with this for a bit and see what I can do with sections which are still a bit of a mystery to me.

Thx

What’s the issue with sections? We could do a Zoom if you want.

my Facebook page

Not so much an issue as the time to get to it. I’ve used Scrivener for years and am quite comfortable with it but this is a new skill. I’m in the midst of a writing project that at the end will be professionally produced as opposed to be self published so content is much more important than style and form at the moment. I’ve got a whole pile of videos and articles on the subject stacked up to read for when I have a chance.

Thanks for the offer and I might very well take you up on it.

Every document is a section, so you’re using sections already. Maybe you mean named section types (as opposed to compile by structure).

This may help, if that’s the case.

Structure to Named Types

I worked through it for an hour and got it all - sections, layouts, structure, compiling - no problem.

The highlight issue is definitely tied to the “styles” issue. If one uses “No Style” the highlighting shows up as advertised.

Tomorrow I’ll redo the chapters to work better with no styles and take my style formatting to into layouts and compiling. I’m only five chapters in so its pretty easy. Shold make front matter a lot easier too.

Thx

2 Likes

You could go on as you have been. If you do that and they fix the bug before final compiles are necessary, maybe it won’t matter.

Did you work through my video?

I had a quick look at a bit of the video but ended up reverting to the manual and “playing” with the software.

No need to go on with styles. I’ve gone full bore into sections. I’ll need those when I get back to my novel since I publish in three formats and the whole point of going to Scrivener 3 was to make that easier.

The styles still work if I want to override the sections’ layouts which would be rarely.

This may be a worthwhile read.

the power of styles in compile

This thread brings back all the agony I went through earlier in the year. I learned quite a bit thanks to postings by drmajorbob but finally decided on a different work flow.

My main problem was that my book was not the classic fiction novel type of “words by the mile with little need for formatting”. I write nonfiction, instructional stuff which relies heavily on page formatting and paragraph styles including lists and nested lists. Unfortunately Scrivener is not that way inclined.

I abandoned attempts to get Scrivener’s compile to produce what I needed and once that decision was made, it was comparatively easy to export the work and complete the formatting and layout in a word processor. The (unexpected) bonus was that once I could see the pages styled, I realised that my book was in fact too large and I reformatted it into three books.

I shall work this way on future books. I really appreciate the ease of using Scrivener as a planning tool and the way the research docs can be kept handy in the binder but once the first draft stage is completed, the clever part is to recognize when is the most effective moment to get out of Scrivener and into a tool where layout can be better structured and seen.

1 Like

I know where you are coming from. While I’ve come to grips with the initial issue that started this thread it got me into doing some work preparing for things downstream even though I do not need them right now. It’s a bit more complicated because I’m also a heavy Aeon Timeline user and they’ve just come out with their newest version. It’s a big improvement but has a foible with folders in synching with Scrivener.
My aim is always to make the program as simple to use as possible even if that means changing the way I work. There are two new paradigms for me but the way I solve them is to play with the software and test its limits before settling on a path.