PF5 Problems & Errors: Report & Discuss

[Tom.G]

Bug!
I clicked "Like" on post #8 of https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/where-to-learn-how-to-design-circuits.942515/post-5962999
And it thought I was @Asymptotic.
As far as I know I'm still Tom.G. Out-of-body experience?

Hmm, just went back and "Liked" again and it worked. Database collision with one transaction dropped? Oh well, probably rare.

 

[Tom.G]

The "Alerts" page does not indicate which have been seen and which are new, kinda needed.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

The "Alerts" page does not indicate which have been seen and which are new, kinda needed.

Which alerts or threads have been seen?

 

[Tom.G]

Which alerts or threads have been seen?

That's what I was trying express... or was that a question you were asking of me?

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

That's what I was trying express... or was that a question you were asking of me?

Do you mean threads because there is no way for us to detect which alerts your eyes have seen

 

[Tom.G]

Yes, threads. They show in the Forums with/without highlighting for not/have been visited, but not on the Alerts page.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Yes, threads. They show in the Forums with/without highlighting for not/have been visited, but not on the Alerts page.

Alerts and Watched threads are different. For watched thread data use this page
https://www.physicsforums.com/watched/threads

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

btw once you visit the alert page or alert drop down, the system will assume you'e seen the alerts and mark the alerts seen. again this is different than watched threads.

 

[Tom.G]

I was referring to the alert dropdown. But the one you triggered by quoting my post had me examining more closely. The seen ones have a "mark unread" post script, which was apparently too subtle for me to spot earlier. Sorry!

 

[Tom.G]

Uhmm, then again, I haven't tried closing then re-opening the Alerts dropdown to see what it does with un-visited alerts.

Are we supposed to remember which ones we've seen or haven't seen. The Forums take on that "remember" workload much better than my volatile memory does.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Are we supposed to remember which ones we've seen or haven't seen.

How can the system know which alert your eyes have seen?

 

[Tom.G]

How can the system know which alert your eyes have seen?

Unknown, but my (poorly worded) comment intended to reference posts in the list that were visited, either via the Alerts list, or perhaps independently after the Alert was created. As distinct from having seen the list. Just like a to-do list where you cross out the items as they are completed, not every time you read the list.

 

[Orodruin]

Unknown, but my (poorly worded) comment intended to reference posts in the list that were visited, either via the Alerts list, or perhaps independently after the Alert was created. As distinct from having seen the list. Just like a to-do list where you cross out the items as they are completed, not every time you read the list.

I agree with this. It is how it used to work in PF4 and at least it used to be important to make sure to visit those threads or you would not get any further alerts from them. I believe it is how many users are used to going through their alerts. It used to be that if you went to your alerts, unread threads or new alerts were specifically marked, letting you know what was actually new since last you visited.

 

[OCR]

And it thought I was Asymptotic.

Oh my !

You should immediately contact your support group. . . no delay. .

I agree with this.

Oh my !

I should immediately contact my support group. . . no delay. . .

Lol. . . .

Carry on.

.

 

[jim hardy]

How can the system know which alert your eyes have seen?

don't we click on them to view ?

 

[OCR]

don't we click on them to view ?

.
Most of the places I go, they won't let you get that close, and it usually costs a bunch of

money. . . "just to view". .

.

 

[fresh_42]

How can the system know which alert your eyes have seen?

Theoretically, if the alert bell carries a red number n, then the last n posts could be presented highlighted, thus marking the boundary between old and new.

What I find more disturbing is, that the red numbers don't refresh other by clicking. It indicates e.g. new alerts although I am currently on that page and have already read the new entry. Same goes for all other red numbers. They do not take the actual situation into account, whereas IIRC they did in the previous version.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

don't we click on them to view ?

You don't need to click on an alert to view it. You just look at the alert and read it. When you click on an alert and go to the thread, it then marks the thread as read in your watched threads list. There is confusion here when talking about alerts vs watched threads functionality. An alert is just a temporary notification message. The alert count is not an unread watched thread counter.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Theoretically, if the alert bell carries a red number n, then the last n posts could be presented highlighted, thus marking the boundary between old and new.

There is a orange left side border to show new vs old alerts. I think the background changes to grey too. Do I need to make more apparent?

 

[Orodruin]

You don't need to click on an alert to view it. You just look at the alert and read it. When you click on an alert and go to the thread, it then marks the thread as read in your watched threads list. There is confusion here when talking about alerts vs watched threads functionality. An alert is just a temporary notification message. The alert count is not an unread watched thread counter.

He is not talking about seeing the alert itself, he is talking about reading the post that the alert refers to.
Even if it is not intended as an unread watched thread counter, I believe it is how many people have been using it.

 

[fresh_42]

There is a orange left side border to show new vs old alerts. I think the background changes to grey too. Do I need to make more apparent?

I think the confusion is another. The orange bar is ok for one or two threads, but not for 20. I (we?) used to click on alert to see the list and then proceed bottom - top to check what we have missed while away.

Now the first click removes the red number whereas a second is needed to list all threads in the alert list. But meanwhile the new-old marker has vanished due to the first click. This was definitely better in the old version.

And a refresh updates the list, but does not update the number, which is disturbing. Similar with PM. If I have a current exchange of messages, back and forth, then - and this is better now than before - additional messages occur without an explicit contact to the server via refresh or so. However, the red number tries to catch my attention to what I actually just read. There is no check, whether those alerts or messages are nonsense because I'm already there.

 

[Wrichik Basu]

Actually @Tom.G tried to say something like this:

When you hover/click upon the alerts, then the system assumes that you have read all the alerts at one go before closing the dropdown. But if someone reads one alert at a time - sees the alert, clicks on the thread, replies to the thread - and again checks the alert dropdown, then already all the alerts have been marked Read, and the person loses sight of which alert he has responded to, and which not.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

When you hover/click upon the alerts, then the system assumes that you have read all the alerts at one go before closing the dropdown. But if someone reads one alert at a time - sees the alert, clicks on the thread, replies to the thread - and again checks the alert dropdown, then already all the alerts have been marked Read, and the person loses sight of which alert he has responded to, and which not.

I understand that and maybe there is something I can do, but in general, it's just a notification system, not a watched thread tracker. When you get multiple alerts I would scan them all. If there are multiple threads, go to your watched thread page.

 

[fresh_42]

I understand that and maybe there is something I can do, but in general, it's just a notification system, not a watched thread tracker. When you get multiple alerts I would scan them all. If there are multiple threads, go to your watched thread page.

That isn't the same. I get alerts for new threads in watched forums, but not on watched threads. The watched forums list would be double action in comparison to alert. And, at least for me, watched forums isn't really what I want to know. New threads, yes, new answers on the 100th QM thread, no. So the alert functionality was just perfect. The calculation routine for the little red numbers however is sub-optimal.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

I get alerts for new threads in watched forums, but not on watched threads.

Please check your settings
https://www.physicsforums.com/account/preferences

 

[Orodruin]

I understand that and maybe there is something I can do, but in general, it's just a notification system, not a watched thread tracker. When you get multiple alerts I would scan them all. If there are multiple threads, go to your watched thread page.

This adds extra clicks because you would need to find that in a separate menu. Is there some way of adding a link to the watched threads page in the alerts drop-down?

 

[fresh_42]

Please check your settings
https://www.physicsforums.com/account/preferences

Sorry, I was unclear.

A new thread from a watched forum creates an alert. Good.
A new thread from a watched forum does not create an entry in the watched threads list. Sure, isn't on watch, yet.
Going to the watched threads list to cover this gap results in too many posts I'm not interested in anymore.

Thus, the alert list is a perfect tool to show new posts and watched threads; without having to check all forums.

 

[jim hardy]

Thanks a Million Greg !
It Works.

old jim

 

[Tom.G]

What Orange border?

 

[Wrichik Basu]

What Orange border?

View attachment 242139

That has been changed to red recently.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

What Orange border?

I changed it to red to match the alert counter. Only when you have new alerts.

 

[fresh_42]

Just a remark.

This summary thingy in SR/GR and QM was a brilliant idea! 2 lines to read instead of 30 just to find out whether it is of interest for someone or not.

 

[dlgoff]

@Greg Bernhardt Lately I've noticed pages (tabs in firefox) reloading without manually doing so via the firefox browser. What is the reason for this?

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

@Greg Bernhardt Lately I've noticed pages (tabs in firefox) reloading without manually doing so via the firefox browser. What is the reason for this?

The server is repolled for alerts every 30sec. We did this in PF4 too.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

This summary thingy in SR/GR and QM was a brilliant idea! 2 lines to read instead of 30 just to find out whether it is of interest for someone or not.

Great, I can keep expanding it to other forums

 

[Orodruin]

Great, I can keep expanding it to other forums

Unfortunately, it is impossible to quote from it - just like the problem statement in homework. In a summary, being able to quote it is even more relevant.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Unfortunately, it is impossible to quote from it - just like the problem statement in homework. In a summary, being able to quote it is even more relevant.

Yup, working on it

 

[jim hardy]

Greg -- Oh No it disappeared !

 

[Tom.G]

This seems to be a condition that does not have a high priority attached to it. I posted about it here a few weeks ago and there was no action taken then either. If others find it annoying and/or a reduced usability problem, chime in about it so it has a chance of being corrected.

Just one problem at a time and we will hopefully get back at least the usability of PF4.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

This seems to be a condition that does not have a high priority attached to it. I posted about it here a few weeks ago and there was no action taken then either. If others find it annoying and/or a reduced usability problem, chime in about it so it has a chance of being corrected.

This is not design but a result of low screen resolution. What device are you using @jim hardy?

 

[Tom.G]

My window size is 1241x816 on a screen of 2048x1152. 102 pixels-per-inch, 4 pixels-per-mm.

Window height must be greater than 918 to show any part of "[->Log out"

 

[fresh_42]

I remember that I also found it disturbing at the beginning when I couldn't find it. It is certainly visited more often than "reactions received". But I admit that this is a general issue of many websites. Log out has to be at the end. Says who? It reminds a bit of ad fade-ins where you can't find the cross to close them.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

@Tom.G @jim hardy @fresh_42 how about now?

 

[fresh_42]

I think this is perfect.

But now I'm thinking about what "update your status" should mean, except for a copy of fb status.
Can I answer this by a quotation: "McCOY (on viewscreen): Aside from a touch of arthritis, I'd say pretty good."?

 

[jim hardy]

This is not design but a result of low screen resolution. What device are you using @jim hardy?

my laptop screen
is this an answer ?

That's the selection with highest numbers - is that resolution ?

 

[jim hardy]

Perfect ! Thank you Greg !

 

[Wrichik Basu]

By the way Greg, did you figure out what bug is causing this error that I mentioned some time back? Actually now it's happening with all the dropdowns like Alerts, Conversations, etc. On my phone (desktop view on), I cannot read the alerts until I zoom in, but as soon as I zoom in, the dropdown just runs away.

 

[Orodruin]

Even if it is not intended as an unread watched thread counter, I believe it is how many people have been using it.

Let me also be clearer with this. It is not just watched threads, but all things watched that create alerts. Including new threads in watched forums. The functionality used to be that alerts were marked as read when you visited the alerts page - meaning that they were marked as new when you did so. Now the alerts are matked as read upon drop down of the alerts menu, meaning that they are no longer marked as unread when you go to the alerts page.

This can be changed by a setting, but regardless of that setting new alerts are not highlighted on the alerts page in the same way they are highlighted in the alerts menu. (All that is different is that they do not have a ”mark unread” link.)

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

This can be changed by a setting, but regardless of that setting new alerts are not highlighted on the alerts page in the same way they are highlighted in the alerts menu. (All that is different is that they do not have a ”mark unread” link.)

There is a setting for this in
https://www.physicsforums.com/account/preferences

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

By the way Greg, did you figure out what bug is causing this error that I mentioned some time back?

Honestly I don't know how to solve this. Dealing with zoom level for browsers is really messy to detect and implement. Zooming with the menus works fine in Chrome.