Reading the results
The results screen is built around four numbers. They are not just a summary: each card is a tab, and clicking one changes what the table below it shows.
Two of them mean less than they appear to. Read this page once and the numbers stop being alarming.
#The four cards
Card | What it counts |
|---|---|
Pages changed | How many pages the run actually rewrote, with a caption showing how many were checked in total. Far smaller than "checked", because the search that finds work is deliberately wider than the conversion itself. |
Macros migrated | Macros converted cleanly. |
Macros failed | Macros that could not be converted, counted per macro (not per page). The caption reads "N unexplained" or "all explained", where explained means Capable recognised the cause and can offer a hint. A failed macro is left exactly as it was on the page. |
Unsupported | Macros left as they were. This is not only "we cannot convert this", it also counts pure do-nothing cases, where a selected migrator had nothing to do on a page. On a wide run those can dominate the number, which looks alarming but is not a data problem. |
Unsupported is the number people panic about. It is not only "we cannot convert this". It also counts pure do-nothing cases, where a selected migrator had nothing to do on a page it was asked about. On a wide run those dominate the number, and none of them are a problem.
#What each card opens
Card | Shows |
|---|---|
Nothing selected | A per-migrator breakdown, with a percentage-clean bar for each migrator |
Pages changed | The page-by-page activity log |
Macros migrated | The same log, filtered to successful conversions |
Macros failed | Issues grouped by cause, with a count and, where we recognise it, a plain-English hint |
Unsupported | The same grouped view for macros that were left as they were |
#Grouped issues
Identical problems collapse into one row with a count. Where Capable recognises the cause, the row carries a hint saying what to do about it. Everything drills down to the exact pages affected.
The Macros failed caption reads either "N unexplained" or "all explained". Explained means we recognised the cause and can offer a hint, not that it is harmless.
#A few things that catch people out
Macros failed counts macros, not pages. One page with twenty broken diagrams is twenty failures.
Recognised-versus-unexpected is based on matching the wording of the error message. A genuinely new failure whose wording resembles a known one will be shown as explained.
Drill-down from an issue group lists at most 2,000 pages, so on a very large run the group count and the list will disagree. The counts are the accurate ones.
#Related
Unsupported is mostly nothing. Failed is the number to read.
