Hello All,
This project uses \pn…\pn* to bold all proper names and I’m wondering this is part of the problem.
This is standard without adjustments:
Situation 1:
If I adjust a paragraph starting in 1:4 using “at MRK 1:3 ‘\p’ > ‘\p_95’” as in the training video, the adjustment works but all the bold markers in the paragraph are removed.
Situation 2:
If I try adjusting the paragraph starting with verse 9 using the above code (modified to 1:8,) the adjustment doesn’t work. I think this is because the section heading contains a name bolded with \pn and maybe the adjustment is applied to the \pn which comes before \p in Paratext. (This bold is redundant as the whole section heading is bold.)
A partial solution to this is if I use “at MRK 1:8 ‘\p([^a-z])’ > ‘\p_95 \1’,” then the adjustment works, but the bold in the paragraph is still removed like in situation 1.
I tried changing the \pn to \bd for bold using " ‘\pn’ > ‘\bd’ " but that didn’t work.
Any ideas on how to fix this?
Blessings,
Craig
Here is the Paratext for 1:3 - 1:9 if it helps.
\v 3 \qt ᥘᥬᥰ ᥞᥨᥝᥴ˕ᥙᥣᥒᥱ˕ᥐᥣᥒ˕ᥐᥧᥢ, ᥛᥤᥰ ᥔᥥᥒᥴ ᥐᥨᥢᥰ ᥐᥨᥝᥳ ᥘᥫᥒ ᥙᥣᥝᥱ ᥝᥣ:\qt*
\q1 \qt ‘ᥞᥣᥒᥲ˕ᥞᥦᥢᥰ ᥑᥨᥢᥴ˕ᥖᥣᥒᥰ ᥓᥝᥲ ᥘᥦᥰ. ᥞᥬᥲ ᥔᥥᥢᥲ˕ᥖᥣᥒᥰ ᥛᥢᥰ ᥔᥪ ᥘᥤ.’\qt*”\x - \xo 1:3 \xt ᥘᥤᥐᥳ ᥕᥤᥱ˕ᥔᥣᥭᥲ˕ᥕᥣᥲ 40:3\x*
\p
\v 4 ᥐᥩᥙ˕ᥘᥢᥴ, \pn ᥕᥥ˕ᥞᥣᥢᥲ\pn* ᥙᥨᥝᥱ˕ᥛᥣᥰ ᥞᥦᥴ, ᥕᥧᥱ ᥘᥬᥰ ᥞᥨᥝᥴ˕ᥙᥣᥒᥱ˕ᥐᥣᥒ˕ᥐᥧᥢ ᥞᥥᥖᥱ ᥛᥣᥒᥱ˕ᥐᥣᥱ˕ᥘᥣᥱ˕ᥓᥫᥛ˕ᥘᥛᥳ\f + \fr 1:4 \fq ᥛᥣᥒᥱ˕ᥐᥣᥱ˕ᥘᥣᥱ˕ᥓᥫᥛ˕ᥘᥛᥳ: \ft ᥚᥩᥒᥰ ᥛᥤᥰ ᥐᥨᥢᥰ ᥑᥪᥢᥰ˕ᥓᥬ˕ᥐᥣᥭᥰ˕ᥓᥬ ᥞᥦᥴ, ᥕᥧᥛᥱ˕ᥛᥣᥖ ᥓᥝᥲ, ᥙᥫᥢ ᥖᥝᥱ ᥞᥥᥖᥱ ᥛᥣᥒᥱ˕ᥐᥣᥱ˕ᥘᥣᥱ˕ᥓᥫᥛ˕ᥘᥛᥳ ᥞᥬᥲ ᥛᥢᥰ. ᥕᥣᥛᥰ ᥞᥥᥖᥱ ᥞᥢᥳ, ᥙᥫᥢ ᥟᥝ ᥛᥢᥰ ᥓᥫᥛ ᥑᥝᥲ ᥘᥛᥳ ᥐᥣᥱ ᥗᥣᥙᥱ ᥘᥫᥒ. ᥘᥣᥒᥴ ᥞᥭᥳ ᥖᥝᥱ ᥙᥥᥢ ᥞᥥᥖᥱ ᥛᥣᥒᥱ˕ᥐᥣᥱ˕ᥘᥣᥱ˕ᥓᥫᥛ˕ᥘᥛᥳ ᥞᥝᥳ.\f* ᥞᥬᥲ ᥙᥫᥢ. ᥛᥢᥰ ᥑᥭ ᥖᥣᥰ˕ᥘᥣᥰ ᥞᥬᥲ ᥙᥫᥢ ᥑᥪᥢᥰ˕ᥓᥬ˕ᥐᥣᥭᥰ˕ᥓᥬ, ᥞᥥᥖᥱ ᥛᥣᥒᥱ˕ᥐᥣᥱ˕ᥘᥣᥱ˕ᥓᥫᥛ˕ᥘᥛᥳ ᥞᥦᥴ, ᥝᥨᥖᥳ˕ᥖᥣᥛᥱ˕ᥖᥣᥒᥰ˕ᥚᥤᥖᥴ ᥑᥝᥴ ᥘᥭᥲ ᥙᥩᥭᥱ˕ᥘᥩᥖ ᥞᥝᥳ.
\v 5 ᥐᥨᥢᥰ ᥛᥫᥒᥰ \pn ᥕᥥᥝᥴ˕ᥗᥣᥭᥲ\pn* ᥐᥧ˕ᥟᥩᥒᥲ˕ᥐᥧ˕ᥖᥤ ᥖᥒᥰ ᥐᥨᥢᥰ ᥝᥥᥒᥰ \pn ᥕᥥ˕ᥘᥧᥲ˕ᥔᥣ˕ᥘᥫᥢᥱ\pn* ᥖᥒᥰ˕ᥘᥣᥭᥴ ᥖᥨᥝ ᥟᥩᥐᥱ ᥐᥣᥱ ᥓᥧᥰ \pn ᥕᥥ˕ᥞᥣᥢᥲ\pn*. ᥑᥝᥴ ᥕᥤᥢᥴ˕ᥚᥤᥖᥴ ᥝᥨᥖᥳ˕ᥖᥣᥛᥱ˕ᥖᥣᥒᥰ˕ᥚᥤᥖᥴ ᥑᥝᥴ, \pn ᥕᥥ˕ᥞᥣᥢᥲ\pn* ᥔᥛᥳ ᥞᥥᥖᥱ ᥛᥣᥒᥱ˕ᥐᥣᥱ˕ᥘᥣᥱ˕ᥓᥫᥛ˕ᥘᥛᥳ ᥞᥬᥲ ᥑᥝᥴ ᥘᥬᥰ ᥑᥥᥰ˕ᥘᥛᥳ \pn ᥕᥥ˕ᥖᥣᥢᥲ\pn* ᥞᥢᥳ.
\v 6 \pn ᥕᥥ˕ᥞᥣᥢᥲ\pn* ᥘᥧᥒ ᥔᥫᥲ˕ᥑᥨᥝᥰ ᥛᥥᥝᥰ ᥟᥝ ᥑᥨᥢᥴ ᥛᥣᥳ˕ᥘᥨᥝᥲ˕ᥗᥨᥝ ᥞᥥᥖᥱ ᥞᥢᥳ. ᥞᥣᥒ˕ᥟᥦᥒᥲ ᥛᥢᥰ ᥞᥣᥒᥳ ᥔᥣᥭᥴ˕ᥘᥒᥴ ᥞᥭᥳ. ᥛᥢᥰ ᥓᥤᥢ ᥖᥤᥴ˕ᥖᥐᥴ ᥖᥒᥰ ᥘᥛᥳ˕ᥚᥪᥒᥲ ᥗᥫᥢᥱ.
\v 7 ᥛᥢᥰ ᥐᥦᥛᥳ ᥐᥦᥛᥳ ᥑᥭ ᥙᥫᥢ ᥝᥣ: ᥛᥤᥰ ᥐᥨᥝᥳ ᥕᥬᥱ˕ᥛᥦᥖ ᥔᥤᥴ ᥐᥝ ᥖᥤᥴ ᥙᥨᥝᥱ˕ᥛᥣᥰ ᥘᥪᥢᥰ˕ᥘᥒᥴ ᥐᥝ. ᥐᥝ ᥞᥪᥛᥴ ᥚᥧᥭᥱ˕ᥘᥭᥲ ᥐᥨᥛᥲ ᥞᥦᥴ, ᥐᥥᥲ ᥔᥣᥭᥴ ᥔᥣᥱ˕ᥑᥣᥭᥳ ᥛᥢᥰ.
\v 8 ᥐᥝ ᥟᥝ ᥘᥛᥳ ᥞᥥᥖᥱ ᥛᥣᥒᥱ˕ᥐᥣᥱ˕ᥘᥣᥱ˕ᥓᥫᥛ˕ᥘᥛᥳ ᥞᥬᥲ ᥔᥧᥴ. ᥐᥩᥭᥰ˕ᥝᥣ, ᥛᥢᥰ ᥖᥤᥴ ᥟᥝ ᥑᥩᥢᥴ˕ᥓᥦᥖ˕ᥛᥦᥖ˕ᥓᥝᥲ ᥞᥥᥖᥱ ᥛᥣᥒᥱ˕ᥐᥣᥱ˕ᥘᥣᥱ˕ᥓᥫᥛ˕ᥘᥛᥳ ᥞᥬᥲ ᥔᥧᥴ.”
\s \pn ᥕᥥ˕ᥞᥣᥢᥲ\pn* ᥞᥥᥖᥱ ᥛᥣᥒᥱ˕ᥐᥣᥱ˕ᥘᥣᥱ˕ᥓᥫᥛ˕ᥘᥛᥳ ᥞᥬᥲ \pn ᥕᥥᥱ˕ᥔᥧᥳ\pn*
\r (ᥘᥤᥐᥳ ᥛᥣᥱ˕ᥗᥣᥭᥲ 3:13-17; ᥘᥤᥐᥳ ᥘᥧᥲ˕ᥓᥣ 3:21-22, 4:1-13)
\p
\v 9 ᥕᥧᥱ ᥘᥬᥰ ᥝᥢᥰ ᥓᥫᥢᥰ, \pn ᥕᥥᥱ˕ᥔᥧᥳ\pn* ᥘᥧᥐᥳ ᥝᥥᥒᥰ \pn ᥘᥣᥴ˕ᥔᥣ˕ᥘᥫᥲ\pn* ᥘᥣᥒᥴ ᥕᥧᥱ ᥘᥬᥰ ᥛᥫᥒᥰ \pn ᥓᥣ˕ᥘᥤᥲ˕ᥘᥤᥲ\pn* ᥞᥢᥳ ᥛᥣᥰ ᥞᥦᥴ, ᥕᥧᥱ ᥘᥬᥰ ᥑᥥᥰ˕ᥘᥛᥳ \pn ᥕᥥ˕ᥖᥣᥢᥲ\pn* ᥞᥥᥖᥱ ᥛᥣᥒᥱ˕ᥐᥣᥱ˕ᥘᥣᥱ˕ᥓᥫᥛ˕ᥘᥛᥳ ᥖᥤ \pn ᥕᥥ˕ᥞᥣᥢᥲ\pn*.
Seems the latest update to version 2.3.36, along with changing the adjustments from \p_95 to \p^95 seems to have corrected this problem.
I checked and if I use the old way (\p_95) the line is adjusted but the bold still goes away. Therefore, I’ll start using \p^95 for adjustments.
Thanks!
The mechanisms between \p_95 and \p^95 are certainly very different. \p_95 is a separate style (which you could set a special colour/font/etc for if you liked!), but \p^95 is a `\p at 95% width.
One thing you should be aware of is that a changes rule with \p in it might work on some versions of python, but on other versions it will crash. You should use \\p (similarly with other slash things - one slash is a special character, (e.g. \s= some kind of space) but use two for a real slash).
Yes, this is the entire line I use:
at MRK 1:20 ‘\p([^a-z])’ > ‘\p_97\1’
which is now:
at MRK 1:20 ‘\p([^a-z])’ > ‘\p^97\1’
at MRK 1:20 ‘\\p([^a-z])’ > ‘\\p^97\1’
Would be much safer. I’ve had what I think was a \p , very like your example, working perfectly on one machine and giving ‘inexplicable’ crashes on another one. - Very explicable when you look hard enough…
That is strange because I copied the code from PTXPrint and it has \p, not \p.
Just posted this and in edit it has two back slashes followed by P for the first one but when I save it it removes one of the back slashes. When I edit my comments above it’s the same. Double back slashes in edit but only one when it posts.
Probably, you need to use markdown syntax (the menu says preformatted) for code snippets. For short sections, that’s a single back-tick marking the start and end, for multi-line sections, a 3 back-ticks on the line before and after (no other space) is the convention.
When you need to type in code/regex expressions, if you select the chunk and then use this highlighted button, it will wrap it in the appropriate format so that backslashes don’t get lost:
