Question Notes are shown doubled when opening them up

This has been going on for a couple of versions now, it worked correctly before. I upgraded today to the newest version.

This problem concerns all "Notes" fields. When the field i collapsed it looks fine:



But when you open the note it is partially doubled, which makes it cluttered:



Any chance to get this corrected?

EDIT: I now realized that I have asked this before and that there is a hack in that thread. Any chances of making it work correctly by default?

> Any chances of making it work correctly by default?

It is working as designed - so it isn't really a bug to fix. What we need is a different design.
And all the suggestions so far just lead to inconsistencies elsewhere.

The issue is that the names of objects in webtrees (indivdiuals, families, sources, etc.) are links to the object.
So, when you look at a source citation (similar formatting to notes), then the name of the source is a link to the source page.

It is the same with shared notes. The name of the shared note (the first 100 chars of the first line) is a link to the note.
The text beneath it is the note itself.

This becomes significant when your note is just a link. e.g.

Now, you'll see www.example.com twice.
The first one is a link to the note record.
The second one is a link to example.com

So, it isn't technically a duplicate, as they are different.

> But when you open the note it is partially doubled, which makes it cluttered:

If we hide the link when we expand the note, then where do we put a link to the shared note? And what text do we put in the link?

Sorry, I don't understand your answer.
The problem concerns inline notes, not shared notes. I don't see any link attached to the online notes.
It worked well with version 1.7. Why did you change?

> The problem concerns inline notes, not shared notes

...and we use the same layout/formatting for inline and shared notes.

In this case, why not hide the useless title when the inline note is unfolded?

> If we hide the link when we expand the note, then where do we put a link to the shared note? And what text do we put in the link?

I use the hack that tekfix mentions and add a link with generic text at the end of the expanded note. I also add a line after the link to make it clear that the link refers to the expanded note above it and not any other note (if one exists) after it.

> In this case, why not hide the useless title when the inline note is unfolded?

It is not useless. It is the link to the page of the shared note.

If we remove it, we will need to a different link instead...

This is useless pour INLINE notes.

I really do not understand how you mean and where the problem is to make this work as it did in previous versions. Did you change the layout or something regarding this after v.1.7? My question is concerning notes within the various fields, and NOT shared notes.

I now made an experiment. Here are the screenshots from that experiment.

First, what it looks like without the fix that we have found. Here the Emigration details are shown, all collapsed:



Neat and tidy. Then what it looks like with one of the source fields and the Note open:



The Note is doubled, with 100 characters of it first and then the entrire note. Cluttered.

Then the versions with the fix. All collapsed:



The Note is open by default in this version. The links are still there and working in the Source field. And finally with the fix and all open.



Much better than the double version without the fix, and no problems with links...

I can not see any problems with the links in the source field...??? The Notes have no links. I also tried to add a shared note, and it displays perfectly under the Notes tab. With no links.

"It is not useless. It is the link to the page of the shared note. If we remove it, we will need to a different link instead... "

No, it is NOT a link to a shared note as it is NOT a shared note that I am talking about but local the notes in the various fields. The first 100 character shown (whether collapsed or open) in those notes are not links.

If I add a link to a shared note instead of writing a local note, then the first 100 characters are working as a link to the shared note when collapsed. When open the link does not show with the fix applied, but is that really a problem as the link is working in the collapsed state? I don't think so... Also the shared link is much tidier this way with the fix applied... The link is just not shown when the entire text is visible and the link would be unnescessary in that situation.

> No, it is NOT a link to a shared note as it is NOT a shared note that I am talking about

We use the same layout for both types of note.

Most visitors to your site will not appreciate the difference between the types of note. They will just see half the notes with one styling and half the notes with a different styling.

> The link is just not shown when the entire text is visible and the link would be unnescessary in that situation.

Unnecessary? How do you navigate to the page for the note?

Most visitors do not know the difference between the types. If they want to read more of a note that displays 100 characters they click on the arrow to open it and are presented with the mixed-up doubled text. If they want to read more of a shared note they probably click on the link and are taken to the page for the note. If they are clicking on the arrow they are presented with the entire note. No links are needed there as they work fine when collapsed. That's a much neater way of presenting the notes than having the 100 chars + the entire note or the entire complicated link + the entire shared note!

> Unnecessary? How do you navigate to the page for the note?

So in my opinion yes, it is unnecessary and it would be much easier for the visitor to read the note without it. You navigate to the page for a shared note by clicking on the link which is shown when the shared note is collapsed. Very few visitor need that page.

fisharebest wrote:

> Any chances of making it work correctly by default?

It is working as designed - so it isn't really a bug to fix. What we need is a different design.
And all the suggestions so far just lead to inconsistencies elsewhere.

The issue is that the names of objects in webtrees (indivdiuals, families, sources, etc.) are links to the object.
So, when you look at a source citation (similar formatting to notes), then the name of the source is a link to the source page.

It is the same with shared notes. The name of the shared note (the first 100 chars of the first line) is a link to the note.
The text beneath it is the note itself.

This becomes significant when your note is just a link. e.g.

Code:

0 NOTE [https://www.example.com](https://www.example.com)

Now, you'll see www.example.com twice.
The first one is a link to the note record.
The second one is a link to example.com

So, it isn't technically a duplicate, as they are different.

> But when you open the note it is partially doubled, which makes it cluttered:

If we hide the link when we expand the note, then where do we put a link to the shared note? And what text do we put in the link?

Greg, I've been following this discussion for some time, and would like to offer some suggestions....

I think the key issue is that regular (INLINE) notes and shared notes are fundamentally different.

INLINE notes are just a block of text positioned as a sub-field of another entity (an event, say), and to edit the note you click the edit icon for the parent entity. A visitor (without edit privileges) can expand/contract such a note, but has no reason to do have any other type of access to the note. There is no concept of a title for an inline note: the visible part of a contracted note is just a "hint" of its contents. Once the note has been expanded, there is no reason to keep displaying the "hint" and indeed doing so is both ugly and confusing.

SHARED notes, as you already said, support more features, and a reference to a shared note is very similar to a source citation. A visitor (without edit privileges) might wish to learn more about this shared note, for example, to find all places where this shared note (or, similarly, this source) is used. Editing the entity (an event, say) that includes a reference to a shared note (or a source) merely allows one to add or remove the reference. It does not provide a path for editing the note (or source).

Every source has an explicit title field, which is configured as a hyperlink leading to the page that provides more information about this source, i.e., find out where this source is used, how to edit the source, etc.

SHARED notes need a hyperlink that provides this same functionality. In my opinion, the first 100 characters of text from the note is a very poor choice! Just as with an inline note, the result looks ugly and confusing. Everything would be much clearer if shared notes had an explicit title field, the way sources do.

Assuming adding titles to shared notes is too big a change, I suggest we add an explicit hyperlink at the end of the shared note, such as "Find more information about this shared note". Obviously, this text would need be translated into other languages. BTW, I tried to think of an icon that could be used for this purpose, but did not find a suitable choice. The "pen icon" is widely used in webtrees as a link to the edit form almost works, but I think it would look out of place at the start of the note, and would get lost if placed at the end. Besides, visitors (without edit privileges) would not recognize it... Perhaps the "info" icon (letter "i" inside a circle) would work, but I don't think it is used anywhere else in webtrees...

PS. I think your one-line note is a terrible example because I don't think anybody would bother creating such a short a shared note. Even worse, in my opinion, is having the URL " www.example.com " become a hyperlink to a completely different location.

How would/should you render a source citation if someone put such a hyperlink in the TITL field of a source???

drblam said:

Everything would be much clearer if shared notes had an explicit title field, the way sources do.

Assuming adding titles to shared notes is too big a change, I suggest we add an explicit hyperlink at the end of the shared note,

Actually it is not a big change if someone wrote a module that added an _TITL tag to every Inline and Shared note. In webtrees this would be similar to what the Vestra does to incorporated the "location" concept into webtrees. If you are not familiar with the concept webtrees normally uses the PLAC tag and a non GEDCOM based data structure to support mapping, the Vestra module adds an _LOC tag to the fact with a pointer to a Location_Record that contains additional information.

All you need to do is find someone to write the module!

A Shared Note would look like:

An inline note would look like this: