Project Session Target figure confused by cut and paste

I may be wrong, but I set up a Project Session target and found that moving text between scenes by cut and paste really confused the word count figure of the Session Target and I ended up with a meaningless figure. Did I do something wrong?

Mike

Nothing wrong, but if you paste text in then it will get added to the session count, and if you cut paste it will get taken away from the session count - Scrivener has no way of knowing the difference between cutting and pasting and typing and deleting.
All the best,
Keith

Thanks Keith. I hadn’t come across or ticked “allow negatives” and I cut and pasted a piece that was more than the number of words I’d written in the session which messed up the statistics.

Cheers

Mike

Hi Keith

I am loving the intraday persistence of 2.0.5’s session targets. Very helpful.

I wonder if at some point you would consider increasing granularity on the way Scrivener tallies progress against the targets. For example, the point raised in this message thread.

It would be great to see the total progress broken down into three pieces: additions, deletions, and net.
On days when I write 1,000 words but delete 700 from somewhere else, the progress tracker will only show me the net addition of 300 words.

If Scrivener tracked additions and deletions separately and allowed me to see this, even though the net was listed as 300 I could see that I’d done 1,000 words that day and that I had been productive.

In the longer term, I’d love to see Scrivener track and record the progress (against session targets) on a daily basis that I could look at, maybe in Outliner-type format, maybe in graph-format, so that I could understand my productivity over the course of weeks and months and look for patterns or insights.

Thanks for listening.

Cheers
-mpuk

Hi,

I’m afraid it’s a fat “no” to all of that, sorry. :slight_smile: I don’t think tracking targets over time really falls into Scrivener’s remit - a spreadsheet would be better suited to that.

As for granularity, there’s just no sensible way of distinguishing deletions and additions properly. It might seem clear cut: you delete a 200-word passage - that’s different to typing 1,000 new words, so surely it can be distinguished? But not so. Consider what happens as you type - often you will hit backspace, or rephrase a sentence and so on. There is no way from a technical standpoint of telling the difference between deleting a 200-word passage and deleting a word from a sentence you are composing, other than volume, which is no indication, really. So any such breakdown would be misleading at best.

All the best,
Keith

Hi Keith,

Yeah. I like that idea too. It’s hard to feel you’ve accomplished anything when only the net figure for the day is shown and you’ve deleted a lot of text. But, in practice, I’m wondering how possible it is to actually separate the additions and the deletions.

Mike

Hi Keith,
Sorry, I didn’t see your reply for some reason. Cut and paste add their own problems to the impossible task. What I’m trying to do is check the word count for any block of text I’m about to delete, mentally adding that to the sessions count for the day.

Mike

It would be possible to add an option that doesn’t count deletions at all, but I think that would confuse many, too, especially those using characters instead of words (as many in Europe do): every typo and correction would boost the count. But the same for any first letter typo of a word: type a letter at the start of a word and the word count goes up by one; delete that letter and it goes down, type another letter and it goes back up. Without counting deletions, every time you had to correct a typo at the start of a word, it would get counted as two words; judging by the number of typos or changes I make as I type, I think this could quickly render counting only additions pretty much meaningless, reporting that you’ve typed many more words than you actually have…

All the best,
Keith

I’m not sure how Scrivener would be able to tell which deletions constitute “progress.” Especially since not all users measure progress in the same way.

For instance, if my ultimate goal is to produce an article that’s 3000 words long, cutting 600 words is a very clear step backward from that target. But if my ultimate goal is to write 1000 new words in a day, cutting 600 words is neutral. If I simply want to spend two hours editing, deletions are just as much “progress” as additions are. I have no idea how Scrivener would incorporate all of these options in any kind of a coherent interface.

Katherine

I agree – there is complexity. Complexity being the mother to both simplicity and sophistication. Technical issues aside, there could be as many ways of measuring “progress” as there are Scrivener users.

What I’m saying is that with finer detail tracked and presented in the category of word count it would allow each of us, whatever word-standard of progress we rely on, to get a measurement closer to the mark. As Keith noted, this would be particularly tricky if a user measured progress in terms of characters.

Cheers
-mpuk