Quark Forums

Don't know if quark is aware of a change in how the find/replace works now. This is one every quark user (especially the "seasoned" users who are used to the old functionality) need to be wary of.

Used to be you could skip a few "replaces", then get to a point in the document (or individual text box) where you know you want to replace "the rest", and then choose change all, and the change only affected "further" finds. Quark has worked that way since the beginning. Now when you do that quark backtracks and changes ALL, including the ones you skipped on purpose.

I suppose this is "some sort of new feature" (as they usually call their programming blunders). This almost caused us a major reprint cost.

So be wary.

Quark, please reply and let us know that a fix is in the works.

I always remember it working that way. If you choose to skip and want to fix select instances, you would have to find change the ones you want to change. Change all will actually change all. Correct?

No, completely changed. You used to be able to ignore as many as you needed to, and then when you want to make further changes you could simply say change all. Quark knew you ignored the "first batch" for a reason and "change-all" ONLY changed any subsequent ones you want to change.

For instance if you have an area where the first part of text is a listing with words and numbers, and you knew some should not change, you could "ignore" those, and when you then got to the purely text area tell it to change "the rest" by saying change all.

If in fact this was purposely chaged functionality within quark, then quark should have made it known in no uncertain terms. I believe it to be a bug that nobody caught. If I truely wanted to change all, I would have said that immediately in the find-change box. Then I would expect a change all to affect all. But when several are skipped, why then go back and change "more"??

Hi Geo,

This was indeed an old bug in the software that was fixed. You have pointed out one side of this issue, but there are probably just as many out there that have clicked the Replace All button expecting all instances to be changed (just as the User Interfaced suggests) only to find that not all instances were in fact changed.

I do appreciate your point of view though, and I will look into some options of providing this behavior with some supporting User Interface so you will know exactly what is being changed when you choose the option rather than having to guess.

Thanks,

Scott Wieseler

QuarkXPress Technical Product Management

Another case of "fixing what ain't broke". Where was the documentation alerting the users to this MAJOR adjustment to the feature?