Update published version overwrites published prototype name

Dann Gardner shared this problem 4 years ago
Solved

I have a single prototype for a new client project. I publish this prototype online to two published versions, an INTERNAL project more frequently to an internal group as screens/features are in process and an EXTERNAL project on a regular basis to the version shared with the client only when screens are complete.


The Prototyper software supports this gracefully - with one exception: On "replace published version" actions, it replaces the name of shared publication with the prototype name, making the two indistinguishable from each other.


In other words, I published:


Project Name (this is the external version)


INTERNAL - Project Name (this is the internal version)


When I replace the published version of "INTERNAL - Project Name", it changes the name of the shared publication to "Project Name".


There appears to be a workaround - I've created a separate "project folder" in Usernote called "Internal Prototypes", but it's not ideal. When replacing a published version, the name of the published version should be retained.

Comments (3)

photo
1

Hi Dann,


correct me if I'm wrong. Do you upload the project with a different file name?


Regards.

photo
1

I did the first time, but when replacing, it was overwritten.


The prototype file is "Prototype 1". I published it as "Prototype 1" and invited external reviewers. I made further edits and published again as "Internal - Prototype 1" and invited internal reviewers. I made even more edits, clicked "Replace published version" and selected "Internal - Prototype 1". When I clicked "Replace", it changed the name of the published version from "Internal - Prototype 1" to "Prototype 1".


The end result of which is two published versions called "Prototype 1" which are nearly impossible to distinguish from eachother in Prototyper. Only the number of reviewers and published dates as displayed in Usernote enable me to see which is which.

photo
1

Hi Dann,


thanks for all the details. I've been able to reproduce this error, so we will try to fix in a future update.


Sorry for the inconvenience.