Clickable web URLs

When I paste a web address into a document it appears as ordinary type, not as an underlined link. I have tried all the menu items which might affect this: rich text, link, etc. but without luck.

All I want to do is to be able to click on web URLs in a document to link to that web page. It must be simple. What am I missing?

Tom

  1. Select the web address/URL or “mailto” text in your document that you want to make a live link.

  2. Invoke the “Make link” command. It can be found under the “Format” menu, as well as in the contextual menu (control-click on the selected text), or as an optionally-installed Toolbar item (View > Customize Toolbar…).

  3. There is no three.

  4. An extra feature: once you’ve made the URL / mailto text a live link, you can drag through the text of the link to select it, then type in a substitute text for that link. It will still be a live link, just with different text.

For example: type apple.com/ somewhere in your document. Select “Make link.” Click on it to verify that the link works. Then drag through that link, and type “link to Apple’s home page.” This new phrase will still be a live link to Apple’s site.

You said:

  1. Select the web address/URL or “mailto” text in your document that you want to make a live link.

  2. Invoke the “Make link” command.

That’s the trouble. when I select a URL I have entered into a document, the “Make link” command is grayed out. What am I missing?

Tom

Tom:

Are you sure you have selected the URL text string? (It should be highlighted if so.) The Format > Make Link command is grayed out if no text is selected.

Ah! Just occured to me. Chance are good that the document that you’re working on in DT is a text document, not a rich text document.

Links don’t work in a standard ASCII, plain ol’ text document. That’s one reason why almost all the documents that I originate in DT are rich text doc, not plain text.

To make a new rich text document (the format is called RTF, for “rich text format”), go to Content > New > Rich text… Then try typing your web address, and see if the “Make link” command is now available.

“The difference between the right word and the almost right word is the difference between lightening and the lightening bug.” ~ Mark Twain

To make a new rich text document (the format is called RTF, for “rich text format”), go to Content > New > Rich text… Then try typing your web address, and see if the “Make link” command is now available. <<

That was one of the first things I tried. I have a page with four web URLs on it. I tried converting the page to Rich Text, with and without the URLs selected. That did not turn opn the “Make Link” comand… Then I started a new document in Rich Text and copied/pasted the URLs to that page, adding a fifth which I typed in. No matter. The Make Link command is still not available.

Tom

Tom:

I’m stumped. I normally run under DT Pro 1.9 beta 5, and haven’t been able to replicate your problem. Just to be sure, I launched DT PE 1.9.1, but still can’t replicate the problem.

Here’s what I tried. I created a new plain text document. I pasted a series of URLs into the new doc, like this: sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/307/5708/357 and so on. Of course, Make Link isn’t an available command for plain text. Then I went to Format > Make Rich Text to convert the doc to rich text. Now, when I select a URL the Make Link command is available and always works (either from Format > Make Link, or from the contextual menu option Make Link).

I’m running OS X 10.3.7. What version of OS X are you using?

Just had a thought. You’re not trying to select multiple URLs and link them all at the same time, are you? I haven’t done that, but I’m certain that would not work.

I’m stumped. I normally run under DT Pro 1.9 beta 5, and haven’t been able to replicate your problem. Just to be sure, I launched DT PE 1.9.1, but still can’t replicate the problem.

Here’s what I tried. I created a new plain text document. I pasted a series of URLs into the new doc, like this: sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/307/5708/357 and so on. Of course, Make Link isn’t an available command for plain text. Then I went to Format > Make Rich Text to convert the doc to rich text. Now, when I select a URL the Make Link command is available and always works (either from Format > Make Link, or from the contextual menu option Make Link).
<<<

That’s what I did, and still no Make Link command.

<I’m running OS X 10.3.7. What version of OS X are you using? <<

OS X 10.2.8, DT 1.9.

<<<Just had a thought. You’re not trying to select multiple URLs and link them all at the same time, are you? I haven’t done that, but I’m certain that would not work. <<<

No, just several individual URLs, selected one at a time on a Rich Text document.

Tom

OS X 10.2.8, DT 1.9.

Everyone using really sophisticated programs that are pushing the OS limits with each program upgrade (DT and NoteTaker and a few others spring immediately to mind) should upgrade their OS and keep it current. OSX 10.3.7 is the current version, Tiger is due out soon and the longer you delay the fewer of the progressive features of these programs will you have available.

Just my $0.02.

ChemBob

Everyone using really sophisticated programs that are pushing the OS limits with each program upgrade (DT and NoteTaker and a few others spring immediately to mind) should upgrade their OS and keep it current. OSX 10.3.7 is the current version, Tiger is due out soon and the longer you delay the fewer of the progressive features of these programs will you have available.<<<

Are you saying that the link feature doesn’t work with OS X 10.2.8? If that’s the problem, fair enough. I’ll find another way to do what I need.

I use word processors, email clients, multi-function software and other programs into which one might enter text. Some are five or more years old. In every case, typing a URL automatically turns it into a clickable link with no need of any further action. No converting to a particular type of text, no clicking on anything – it just happens atomatically.

If you are saying that, in order to use a handy feature of DT, one must have a very recent version of system software and still perform several keyboard and mouse actions in order to accomplish what old software has been doing for years without all that, I’m afraid I can’t see that as a step forward for a sophisticated program. I’d call it a bug. For a new feature, unique to a particular application, which can only work with the latest system software, what you say makes sense. When a program adds layers of difficulty on top of what used to be simple, in my book that’s not progress.

Every time I upgrade (and I’ve been doing it faithfully since before the Apple II was invented) it costs me $1,000 in software and several weeks of work before I get everything functioning as conveniently as before. Nowadays I do it as rarely as possible. I don’t trade in my car every year either. :wink:

Thanks for the advice. I understand where you’re coming from, but, respectfully, I don’t agree. I’d rather give up one piece of software (which is hardly necessary in this case) than go through the misery of frequent system upgrades just to maintain the functionality I had before in numerous old applications.

Cheers,

Tom [/i]

I’ve upgraded every upgrade of OSX and not had to replace a single piece of software that ran under the previous OSX version, so that is not a valid argument. The upgrade from Jaguar to Panther was what, about $100 if I recall, but none of the “10.3.x” upgrades cost a dime. It’s only the major versions that are being charged. What I was trying to say but perhaps did not say clearly enough is that Apple is installing lots of features in the OS to which developers can “hook” their programs, allowing them to take advantage of advanced features without having to recode them from scratch. This also allows programs to play nice together, allowing greater interaction and integration. I don’t know specifically whether DT allows that for which you are asking but I do know that they are among the programming groups that are using the OS extensibility to its fullest potential.

Also, you would be happier with OSX 10.3.7. Its faster, has more features and is more stable than OSX 10.2.x. Wasn’t trying to aggravate you, just give you my opinion.

ChemBob