happenchance says:

I seem to have found a problem where I can add a book to my faves, yet it never retains any of the book's details (image, name, author, id etc).

Here's how I managed it... (sorry Dan)

1. Searched for 'The God Delusion' from amazon.co.uk search facility
2. Added the first result to my favourites. (url: http://www.revish.com/books/0593055489/AWS_UK/?fave=1)
3. View favourites to find it has added a book to my list, but with no details retained... it's blank effectively (no title, nothing... just an image saying 'No Cover Available')

I also cannot remove/rate/review the book as it doesn't seem to have any unique identifier (it's url is as follows: http://www.revish.com/books//?unfave=1)

I'm sure there should be an identifier between those forward slashes?

I tried this same process with the american version of the book (from Amazon.com) and it added the book no probs. http://www.revish.com/books/0618680004/

#1 Posted 1 years ago

danchamp says:

Yeah, there's an intermittent problem with Amazon not returning results for a single book query. It should be easily fixed, it's on the list. In the meantime I'll ensure this sort of problem doesn't make it through to your lists, so even if it fails it won't create a record and you won't see books without identifiers.

Thanks for the report!

Dan

#2 Posted 1 years ago

garrettc says:

I've just been hit with this bug as well it seems, unfortunately I cannot for the life of me remember what book it was I tried to add (sorry). It was in the initial post-signup flurry of pushing all the buttons to see how Revish worked.

The entry can be seen seen at the top of my favourites. As with happenchance's report, the urls for taking action on the miscreant tome don't contain an identifier.

It's not too much of a pain, just thought I should let you know that it's still possible for a record to get into this state in case you've rolled out a fix and thought the bug squashed.

#3 Posted 1 years ago

danchamp says:

Thanks for the report. I hadn't fixed it (a bit slack of me), but will get onto it right now (it's very annoying).

#4 Posted 1 years ago

garrettc says:

That appears to have fixed it. Thanks Dan.

#5 Posted 1 years ago

danchamp says:

No problem, it is fixed now, it was a bad query causing some weird behaviour in a few places.

#6 Posted 1 years ago