Quote:
Originally Posted by PatNY
One thing that may or may not be a glitch:
When in square/AR layout, I don’t notice any difference in cover size when I switch between large and medium covers. It appears to only show medium even if “Large” is selected. For both large and medium, I get 4 full shelves showing, top to bottom. Whereas in portrait/AR with large covers selected, only 3.5 rows show. Is this by design for the square/AR layout? If so, no biggie, as I think I might stick to medium covers in this layout anyway.
|
This is caused by my "fudge factor" to squeeze books if another cover can fit by adding 1/2 a cover. That factor is too large, causing the large covers to get "squeezed" down to medium. I have changed the factor to 1/5th a cover, meaning that if 4/5ths a cover amount of empty space is already there we will "squeeze", and I now see the differences in sizes.
Quote:
|
I find the current options sufficient enough, but if you offered this additional tweaking, I would likely use it. You might want to use the word “thin” or “narrow” instead for the .60 ratio.
|
I suspect that fewer options is better. I might want 2 portrait sizes, but probably not 4 as I was proposing. That way we would have "normal", "wide", and "square". I will discuss this with Steven & Annie once things settle.