Changes missing for sets

Support Ticket


Wagn 1.7.0


Can not see changes of a set card.

I have a card that bases on set cardtype. When I create cards basing on that cardtype I see just the set definition of the basing cardtype and not the changes of the current card. 

Is that a general issue of sets? 


This is a general issue of the *content setting, in that the content of the card itself is overridden by the *content setting. In most cases, what is wanted is a view of the changes of subcards included by the card itself.


It is possible to see those changes one at a time by looking at included cards (which you can access through the related tab).  So, for example, you can see changes to +content, +tags, etc.


When we refactor our revisions handling, we hope to build a much more sophisticated approach to this issue.

- ethan

I hope that also. A card and its pluscards have to be handled as a union. I think a user must not know the internal structure. I have understand a pluscard as a part of embedding card. That means a search should result the embedding card and changes should be accessible thru the embedding card.


Does there exist a way to offer the user a link to the embedding card when he looks on a pluscard? There is only one embedding card for each pluscard?

  --dermicha.....Wed Aug 17 13:20:23 -0700 2011

Well, a given card can be included by any number of cards. For example, the card +screenshot is included above by Changes missing for sets and can also be included here:


Changes missing for sets+screenshot


You can see a list of all the cards that include a given card by going to +*includers (eg +screenshot+*includers), which itself is included under the card's Related tab.


But even though a card may have many includers, it will only have one left and one right (with the divider being the rightmost "+"). So from any given plus card you can refer to either as _left or _right. For example, this card is named Changes missing for sets+discussion, and I can show its left and write with Changes missing for sets (yielding Changes missing for sets) or discussion (yielding discussion). The same goes for inclusions.


And in fact, there are several variations and shortcuts -- see contextual names.

  --Ethan McCutchen.....Wed Aug 17 14:31:27 -0700 2011