New option: increment placeholder counters for selective compile as if whole document is being compiled.

So that you can have Chapter two, headed as ‘Chapter two’ even if it’s the first document exported in your selection.

Priority: the world won’t crack in two without it.

This could be rather difficult, considering what all might constitute “selective compile”. What I’m thinking is, I bet the single-group selection mechanic, where this capability is provided, simply compiles the whole thing and then chops the top and bottom of the file off of the output. That’s pretty easy to do, and while it consumes a bunch of time compiling 150,000 words out of the 10,000 you want, it’s really the only effective way to do so.

But what if we have that 10,000 words scattered into 25 different documents all throughout the draft folder, and in a different order than they appear in the binder? While your description here is of a simpler case, the mechanism for what you are describing would have to be capable of more complex context as well. For example:

  1. Select a Collection as your compile content source. This is a manually gathered group of documents that have documents organised out of binder order—perhaps to experiment with an alternate flow of narrative.
  2. Enable the filter feature to strip out stuff from that collection that is marked with the label “Notes”.

All right, so the only effectively way to properly calculate numbering placeholders is to compile the entire draft at once, since placeholders can come from anywhere—they can be in the text editor, they might be in compile settings such as chapter breaks or styles, they might not even exist until fully compiled, such as in cases of using a Replacement to generate a figure caption number.

But we can’t compile the whole draft to get the a static numbering solution because the draft is in the wrong order, at least from the perspective of what we’re currently compiling. We can’t also just use the Collection as a proxy for the draft, because then that defeats the desire to have numbers static as they are in context with the full draft (“chapter 8” not “chapter 1” simply because it is the first chapter break Type in a collection).

And that’s not even getting into the snarl that would be involved, in detecting and extracting from a long text file, all of the fragments of text from that file that are in the Contents compile list (where we could ostensibly then reorder them according to the Contents list). It’s not even as simple as inserting a whole raft of internal separators to clearly mark the identity of an item, because fragments of text again might not even exist until compiled. There are <$include> tags to consider, Replacements which can generate text or even remove text so that nothing from the section remains, Layouts that might be radically modifying the output, etc.

In short: we can perhaps imagine how such a thing could work if only some features of Scrivener are used, but given the extreme difficulty in determining whether Problematic Feature X is used, and whether X is only a problem if in conjunction with Y, after being mixed with Z—I don’t think there is an actual easy answer to this problem that even makes the basic usages of such a capability plausible.

I could be wrong, I’m just thinking of this from a standpoint of logic and feature integration—perhaps there are mechanisms internal to the compile process that would help that I’m not thinking of, but it all seems like an idea that would work in a different kind of software than Scrivener.

Meanwhile I can’t help but wonder if the simplest answer isn’t to just compile the whole thing and cut out the parts of the draft you don’t want in a word processor.

This is exactly how it works - except that it only compiles from the first document in theDraft up to the end of the compile group and then chops off the top (so that it at least doesn’t waste time compiling the end, which isn’t required to get the placeholders right). It would be very difficult to do this with a selection,

Mmmmm, not sure but this is starting to sound as if it’s leaning ever-so-slightly towards a ‘no’. :smiley:

Fair enough; it does sound like it would be quite difficult, especially for something that I don’t think many people would make use of.

I think printing the whole document and cutting it up is one option, or what I’ve started to do is just use temporary section headers and a custom placeholder for the chapter header.

Thanks anyway, and keep up the excellent work. :smiley: