Give the score and parts unique numbers in the layout list

Numbering the parts is a great feature so you quickly can get an overview of the PDF-material, and see that everything is there.
The ‘problem’ now is that, if you have one score and a bunch of parts in the layout list, both the score and the first part gets the number 1.
I guess you have some thoughts about this and that this is an expected behavior, but I think it’d be so nice if every layout could get an unique number. This would make the sorting of the PDF’s much more logical.

Well, this isn’t a very big issue, but since I always have to renumber the PDF-score manually I thought it’d be worth mention anyway.
Looking forward to the version 3 of Dorico! :smiley:

Cheers

This has been mentioned before, and we’ll have a think about how to provide an option for whether or not the numbers are sequential across all layouts or within each type of layout (as they are now).

Ah, I’m sorry for posting a new thread on an already discussed topic.

I found one thread discussing this topic and I realize that different users have different needs and wishes the functionality.

To me, different series for different types of layouts only messes up the sorting of the PDF-documents when there are multiple documents with the same numbering. To me it’d be much more useful if the numbering only reflected the position in the layout panel, with respect for other users having different needs.

This is how it ends up with a couple of different scores included in the PDF-export.

The whole point of numbering the PDF-files, for me, is that I easily can see if there is anything missing, since the eye quickly registers e.g. a broken series of numbers.
LayoutNumbers.png

I have the same frustration with score and first part both 1. Perhaps have the program number the full score with a default of 0 for all layouts instead of 1 and with the first part as 1 as it is at present; consequently no duplication, at least at the beginning.

Welcome to the forum, cwiltshire. As I indicated in my earlier reply, we’re certainly open to adding further options for layout numbering in future.