Translating text without moving underline/subscript applies to underline

[Junopsis]

So I want to have a long underline, with smaller text only in the middle. That much is easy by not using 'underline words only'. What I can't figure out is how to have an underline with text under it. If I pick subscript, the entire underline moves along with the text. If I go into Advanced Settings and change the base vertical font offset, the underline also moves with it.
How do I get the text shifted down and leave the underline where it is? (If that's a terrible description, think a mad lib where there is an underline, blank, with italicised smaller-than-other text underneath it).

(A good alternative would be graying out the text on that line? But that grays out the underline too...)

[GarryP]

Welcome to the forum Junopsis.

Here's a quick way to do what I think you want:

* Create the text without any underline.
* Select the word you want to put under the underline.
* Go to Colour & Effects.
* Press the Strike Out button.
* Long-press the Strike out button and change Displacement to 100%.
* Go to Advanced Settings.
* Change Offset to Baseline to - (minus) 100%.

You will probably need to click away from the text to see that the formatting has been properly applied the first couple of times you use it and you will need to add an extra line break at the end of each line - or double your line spacing - but it works.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Junopsis]

Fascinating.
That does the job.

The thing I don't get is why, when I add more of these formatted lines, that the amount of text my box will display gets shorter. When I made the first strikeout, the bottom quarter of the text in the box disappeared. Now (after placing it in a couple of spots), only a quarter of the text box will fill with text. It's there, and if I delete the strikeouts it will reappear. I can't make the text box any bigger (it already fills the page).
(I checked: switching to something default like Times New Roman doesn't fix this at all; thought currently I'm using TexGyre Pagella. It shouldn't be overflowing if 3/4 of the box is still empty and available for text. I don't get it.)
(also checked: if I link multiple pages' text frames, it might show one or two lines per entire page of this... I'm not sure this formatting method agrees with Scribus)

[GarryP]

Unfortunately I can't replicate the problem you're getting (I've only checked with Scribus 1.4.6 64-bit on Windows 10 though).
See my attached SLA where I've used styles to make things easier to format.
It might give you some idea of what's going wrong with yours.

One thing to keep in mind is that what you're doing with this technique is quite unusual and probably not something that the developers of Scribus were thinking about. It's more of a hack than a recommended practice so this area might not have been thoroughly tested.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Junopsis]

It would figure, I always do end up trying to do things weird.

Totally have the same problem with your file on 1.5.1, which is what I'm using, so that seems to be the problem.

Updated from 1.5.1 to 1.5.3 and ...the display issue isn't a problem. I can only offset so far in that version, though (even your file shows up with the down-shifted text basically underlined; the vertical shift only really moves the strikeout downwards).
1.4.6, the last 'stable' version, works just fine for the strikeout/shift, so I'm making a fresh document from scratch (my publisher's preferred template doesn't load in it since it's from a newer version of Scribus, naturally).

Thanks for helping me out here!

[GarryP]

You're welcome Junopsis.

Before you get too far down the line with 1.4.6 it might be worth asking your publisher why they prefer you to use a 1.5.x template.

If it's just a preference, and not a rule so you can use any version, then you could be okay.

However, if they really need 1.5.x for some reason - maybe they insist on a certain PDF version or something - then you could have trouble.

For instance, say you create your formatting in 1.4.6 and try to open the SLA in 1.5.x to create the required PDF. If 1.5.x doesn't apply the formatting in the same way as 1.4.6 - as it sounds from what you have said - then your resultant PDF probably won't be correct.

If this is the case you might have to go down the more basic route of underlining spaces and typing the words on the line underneath as per my attached sample. Not a great solution - lots more work and awkward modifications needed if formatting changes - but it should work on any version of Scribus.

Only the developers can say why 1.5.x wouldn't handle formatting from 1.4.6, but 1.4.6 might be allowing something which it shouldn't. Like I said earlier, it's not something that's normally done, but maybe it should be allowed for as you have a perfectly viable use case as far as I can see.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Junopsis]

Yeah, I had to ask about the versions thing and I think it was just what they happened to have. So far it's working out all right, but we'll see how the proof comes in.

Science! (I wrote it down, it's science.) Thanks for the advice!

Now why their uploader can't detect when a file does in fact meet their bleed requirements, that's an answer I'm sure I'll never get. (it meets them, they've said it meets them, it's previously printed like it meets them.... their site can't tell. Their own template files get flagged for "are you sure it has bleed".)

[GarryP]

Sorry, but I can't help with the uploader/bleed issue. I normally don't get stuff printed so it's not something I come up against. Maybe someone can give you an answer but if it all seems to work, even with the flagged "problem", then it's probably okay to ignore it until it really stops working. (Doesn't give you much confidence in the process though.)