If there are blocked sections and you need to replace a term, the blocked sections are skipped.
This is not a problem if there are few sections, but in very long files, unlocking sections is complex and may require replacing a term in them.
Steps to Reproduce:
1. Call Find and replace dialog
2. Write the terms to replace
3. Click any button
4. Terms are replaced in all sections except for protected ones.
Terms are replaced in all sections except for protected ones.
Activate a check box that allows replacing the terms throughout the document, omitting if the section is protected or not.
User Profile Reset: No
A warning can be displayed when activating or initiating the replacement attempt. Maybe stop at a match inside a protected section.
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/60.0
Created attachment 142284 [details]
An example of results.
This is an example of what happened to me. I tried to change the name of a character in my novel and it was changed in the whole document but it was kept in blocked sections. Until I discovered this, I almost went crazy. If I had not found by accident that the name still remained in this paragraph (and in 7 other coincidences), I could have followed a serious error at the time of publishing.
Having the option of omitting the protection or a message that warned me that they were not replaced X amount to be in blocked sections would have been very helpful.
We discussed the topic in the design meeting
+ another option on top of what we have makes it not worse, so +1
+ OTOH manually changes to protected sections are not possible, so why automatic
+ if we don't allow the operation we could give better feedback like
"Search key replaced 42 times. But there are 2 protected sections that weren't touched."
(the last is my recommendation)
Yes(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #2)
> We discussed the topic in the design meeting
> + another option on top of what we have makes it not worse, so +1
> + OTOH manually changes to protected sections are not possible, so why
> + if we don't allow the operation we could give better feedback like
> "Search key replaced 42 times. But there are 2 protected sections that
> weren't touched."
> (the last is my recommendation)
Después de publicar pensé en los archivos compartidos que uno espera no se modifiquen. Así que creo que:
1) Un mensaje más detallado (incluso la cantidad que no se reemplazó por estar en secciones protegidas).
2) Este mensaje, más visible y/o destacado (color, negrita, enmarcado, etc.) porque se pierde entre todo el contenido de la ventana.
After publishing, I thought about the shared files that one hopes will not be modified. So I think that:
1) A more detailed message (including the amount that was not replaced by being in protected sections).
2) This message, more visible and / or highlighted (color, bold, framed, etc.) because it is lost among all the contents of the window.