Errata

The step for creating the group field reads as following in the online addition:
Because we want to group several of the fields in this content type together (the Pros and Cons, ratings, and so on), we'll first create a Field group to organize them. Under "New group," create a new group with a label of Section 4.13" and a group name of "summary" and save the form.

I'm assuming there's a typo there and that the label is not supposed to be named "Section 4.13".

I'm enjoying reading the book.

Thanks,

Mark

Part of chapter 2 involved creating new user roles, users, and assigning permissions to those roles.

Figure 2-32 *almost* exactly matches the permissions that we are actually supposed to set for those new user roles.

The only difference is that the figure has the permission "use PHP for block visibility" check-marked whereas p53 says it's not to be checked.

While the text doesn't say that the figure illustrates how we're supposed to configure the permissions[1], it would be nice for them to match, especially since they're so close already.

[1] Beyond p52: "This screen, as seen earlier in Figure 2-32, is massive, and there's a lot to do here."

First edition. (...) browsing though available jobs should be: browsing through available jobs.

Under the heading 'Fields' on page 95 (in [9/09] printing) the first sentence says
"Functionally, CCK is set up into two end-user pieces."

Firstly, I think it makes more sense to say "split up into" rather than "set up into".

Secondly, the following pages go on to describe _three_ separate pieces of functionality (Fields, Widgets and Formatters) so it would be more helpful to say "three end-user pieces", and also to list them at that point, for example

"Functionally, CCK is split up into three end-user pieces: fields, widgets and formatters."

The confirmed errata lists:

"The page ends with a sentence saying a list of all CCK field types is available at: http://drupal.org/project/Modules/category/88

What I am actually seeing at that URL is a list of all modules. It's the same as http://drupal.org/project/Modules/

Note from the Author or Editor:

The URL should be changed to http://drupal.org/taxonomy/term/88"

http://drupal.org/taxonomy/term/88 does not list all CCK field types. It lists "CCK (Content Construction Kit) related modules and plug-ins.".

It's also unclear from the text why a link to "a full list of available CCK field types" is necessary, when a few sentences prior the text says, "The field types included in CCK 'core' are displayed in Table 3-1." Are we to assume that the (broken) link is supposed to go to a list of all field types available in both CCK "core" and contributed modules?

The page number 96 refers to the [9/09] printing, by the way.

A missing comma makes the sentence hard to understand on the first pass, especially as there is a line break after the phrase 'content type'.

In the first sentence in the last bullet point

"A general rule of thumb is that if you can remove the field and the content type still makes sense, ..."

There should be a comma after the word 'field', so the sentence reads

"A general rule of thumb is that if you can remove the field, and the content type still makes sense, ..."

which stops the reader from temporarily thinking that the author means 'remove the field and the content type', before he reads past the line break and discovers that's not what the author meant.

Hope that makes sense :-)

The text as it currently reads is a non sequitur:

"Leaving this setting unchecked will help reduce the likelihood that she is spammed by people applying for multiple jobs at once. This narrows down the list of potential users that can be selected."

The setting being referenced has no effect on the selection list. The second sentence above is in the wrong place. It belongs after the first sentence in the same bulleted section.

"Views provides many exciting options to easily configure the display of your content. The settings for EACH view display can be configured all at once using the Defaults tab, or EACH display can have its own settings that override the vie defaults."

Emphasis mine. Should the first "each" be "every"? As in:

"Views provides many exciting options to easily configure the display of your content. The settings for every view display can be configured all at once using the Defaults tab, or each display can have its own settings that override the vie defaults."

[9/09] printing, BTW.

Terminology. Second paragraph in the box uses the phrase "Fields display type". Fields is not a display type. The (default) display types are Attachment, Block, Feed and Page.

Maybe "Fields selection criteria" or "Fields specification" would be more appropriate. Accurate terminology is vital, especially for something relatively complex like Views, to avoid confusing somebody who's learning Drupal for the first time.

First Edition. #5, first line:
(...) and add the Post date sort
should be replaced by:
and assign Sort order: Descending to the node Post date.

The Title field is shown inconsistently in the figures.

The figure on the bottom of p.136 (should be labelled "Figure 3-38") shows the default Title for the "applications" view as having been set to "Applications" (non-italics) but this step was not included in the text. Table 3-32 then instructs the reader to perform the step for the "Page" display but Figure 3-40 shows no Title at all - default or overridden - even though figure displays the "finished" result.

"Applications" is back however in Figure 3-41 (p.139 top) as the default (italicized) Title for the "Page" display, and in Figures 3-45 (p.143) and 3-46 (p.144) as the default Title for the "Job tab" display. (BTW, the list of Fields - and showing them in italics - in Figure 3-45 appears wrong for the "Job tab".)

It seems more logical that Figures 3-38, 3-41, 3-45, and 3-46 are correct about the Title field, and that it's the text that should be corrected.

It also appears that the first paragraph on p.143 is referring to Figure 3-42 (p.139 bottom) instead of Figure 3-41 (p.139 top).

Figure 3-48 (p.146 bottom) gets Title right! If you're seeking perfection: Table 3-38 shows that Title with a lowercase "a".

On the "Confirmed errata" page, there is a correction for pp.131-146 where references to Figures are off by one. The correction itself contains an error:
Page 136, item #7 (first sentence): CHANGE: Figure 3-38 TO: Figure 3-39
Page 137, first paragraph: CHANGE: Figure 3-38 TO: Figure 3-39...

The surrounding text on these two pages suggest different Figures - that one of these two corrections is wrong. My newer printed edition contains all of the corrections in this entry, except that p.136 item #7 says "Figure 3-38" rather than "Figure 3-39". It seems that the error in the errata regarding p.136 was corrected for later printings but not corrected on the errata page.

Those with older printings will be mislead by the errata page.

This sentence could be easier to read if broken into two sentences.

"Pulling up lists of job applications is simple to do," is a complete thought and should stand as it's own sentence terminated with a period, not a comma.

The next part of the sentence is awkward. Instead of "we want to use a piece of data from the Job type that the tab is being shown on," should be replaced with "we want to use a piece of data related to the Job type shown." Or better yet, "we want to use the node ID related to the Job type shown."

Under Fields is (field_product_id_asin)Amazon: List price Price then (field_product_id_asin)Amazon: Title Title. The order should be reversed.

The button is not titled "Create New Preset" button in 6.19. There it says "Save Preset".

Text reads: "Go to at Administer -> Site building -> Modules (admin/build/modules) and enable the following:"

The "at" shouldn't be there.

In table 7-13, it should be Content: Photo (field_photo) instead of Content: Image: Image(field_photo)

PS -- thanks for a great book. I have put two of your projects online already and they work great.

Under Locale > Translations the second to last paragraph ends with this sentence.
"The coverage for module translations is not very thorough, and as modules can be updated much more frequently than Drupal?s core translations, can become outdated quickly."

I'm no grammar major but I think that last comma is out of place and should read:
The coverage for module translations is not very thorough, and as modules can be updated much more frequently than Drupal?s core, translations can become outdated quickly."

Under "Hands on: configuring Locale Features" > "Language Negotiation Settings". The sentence reads:
"We are going to use the ?Path prefix with language? fallback rather than the ?Path prefix only? option,..."

It should be:
"We are going to use the ?Path prefix with language fallback" rather than the ?Path prefix only? option,..."
as that's the full term used in the drupal config admin/settings/language/configure

reads:

2. Drag the block into the ?Rightt sidebar? region, and then click the ?Save blocks? button.

Extra "t" in there, should be
2. Drag the block into the ?Right sidebar? region, and then click the ?Save blocks? button.

You state that one of the results is not translated, but you don't say *how* to recognize this is the case (untranslated strings have the language code displayed with a strikethrough). It is almost impossible to see that this is the case by looking at Fig 8-31 as the resolution isn't high enough (and it's a lousy interface metaphor in any case, not that this is your fault.