On 6 Jul 2007 at 21:03, Christopher Smith wrote: > On Jul 6, 2007, at 8:29 PM, David W. Fenton wrote: > > > On 6 Jul 2007 at 20:21, Christopher Smith wrote: > > > >> I had a choral piece with 2 systems per page. The first page had > >> the systems set at 67% to make extra room for the title, while > >> succeeding pages were set at 75%. When I altered the layout to add > >> systems, they were at 70% (I suppose that was the document > >> default.) No problem, I thought I knew how to deal with that; click > >> on the zoom tool and make THEM 75%, too! Whoops, the zoom tool > >> tells me they are ALREADY at 75%, but I can see with my bare > >> eyeball that they are not. Fortunately, the resize function is > >> duplicated, and under Page Layout I have Resize Staff Systems, > >> which worked properly. > >> > >> I dunno, maybe this is more a case of the Zoom Tool not knowing > >> what the Resize menu item is doing? > > > > Uh, zoom tool? Is that something new? The only zoom tool I know of > > does not have any effect on actual page layout, only on display > > magnification. > > Sorry, Resize Tool. Looks like a percentage sign. The way it was > supposed to work was, let's say I had sized a system to a certain > size. If I select one of the measures in Mass Edit and hit the down > arrow, it creates a new system. The new system is supposed to be the > same size as the one I was just on, but if it isn't then I should be > able to resize IT with the resize tool. I couldn't, and that was the > problem.
Oh, yes -- that bug is *ancient*, but the reason for it, I think, is because there's a weird disconnect between the UI of the default system settings and the way things work when you set them in page layout. It just doesn't work the same. That is, if in the default system dialog you set your system size to 90% it won't be the same as if you do the same thing with the percentage tool in page layout. I think this is one of those "leaky abstractions," where the user has to deal with some inconsistency deep down in the code of Finale that doesn't allow the users to get what they expect in terms of consistent behavior in the UI. These kinds of problems are often *very* difficult for programmers to fix, because they wouldn't be there in the first place if everything were actually accomplished completely consistently in all places. I have always suspected that the reason they don't have the same results is because you're actually not operating on the same thing, even though from all appearances it seems as though you are. Is this the one they claim is fixed? -- David W. Fenton http://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
