It’s a good point. Perhaps we should explore defaulting to not having the 3 character search limit, and instead limit the number of results shown in the search results dropdown.
4 Likes
Yes, but Rather than introduce another “limit” to all search results, perhaps we can
- PIf the search string is only one/two characters long
- Find a way to add a new UI element to help a “too short” icon.
- a message icon on hover “suggests its too short, click to search anyway”
- clicking the message icon performs a search with a maximum search limit now applied.
- such a search string too short message icon also becomes a form of self documentation, it tells you about the limit only when the search string is under the limit.
- Someone may choose to change the ## Hidden Setting: Search Minimum Length
so we should honor that, but remind them as proposed with the two short message icon.
More often than not I expect the user is looking for titles containing their one or two character string not the content (although not exclusively).
- Examples may be tiddlers titled with a #, ?, !, ( - or #1, *3 in the title
We had a lot of complains, that the search text input got “slow” and “jumpy”, if a TW had many tiddlers. That’s why the 3 char limit was introduced.
If we limit the list, the “jumpy” input behaviour will probably come back, even if the resulting list is shorter.
I’m no fan of limited lists, without a clear indication, that there is “…more” info available. So if we add a filter-limit, we will also need to improve the UI, to add a visual indicator.
1 Like
A vero
TT
I agree mario but I am suggesting it to opperate as is just provide an option when less than the limit, not auto search.
The performance issues stem from rendering, not from doing the actual search. Limiting the displayed results will give us reasonable performance.
A client has a wiki with just under 70,000 tiddlers. We limit search results to 250 results, and get perfectly reasonable performance, even when searching for “the” (which is a reasonable analogue for a single character search).
I think that would be easy enough.
2 Likes
I think three characters limit with current status of standard searchbox (it looks for results in title, tags, text) is reasonable. I dont like when I enter a in the searchbox see a list of result.
1 Like
Is there really anyone who scans 250 items in a search result for the right one? In my experience (and custom search results tiddler) 30 results is more than enough for me to reach a point where I’d rather modify my query than go on scanning. But maybe I’m more impatient than others so take it with a grain of salt.
Anyway, just in case, I put in a message that informs about the limit being hit and contains a link to the config tiddler to change the limit as well as a button that launches the $:/AdvancedSearch with the corresponding query, which will show all the results, should I ever need that (never so far, though).
I believe that a usable and flexible search that lets one quickly find content is the most important feature for a (large) wiki. This is one of the reasons I love TW so much – you can just tailor the search (or nearly anything!) to your needs and are not stuck with what the system gives you, if you’re willing to put in the time. Regarding search, time put in < time saved.
Have a nice day
Yaisog
PS: Apart from different sort parameters, I implemented search within a selected tag hierarchy, selectively include journals, selectively highlight search results, result preview, selectively hide “All matches” for speed; all of which I find very useful. Since not all of that fits into a dropdown, I moved the search results into a sidebar tab, to make better use of that screen space. I’ve also seen other good ideas here on the forum.
1 Like
It’s not always the case the user is trying to pin down one search result – there’s also the possibility the user wants to find-then-edit ALL the results:
Change all mentions of “Facebook” to "Meta"
@jeremyruston I think I’m in agreement with the “More…” proposal. And when clicked, it should launch an alternative UI (temp tiddler, maybe?) such that lengthier result lists become more manageable (much like how discourse does it).
1 Like
This was more about if you’d limit the number of results, why set the limit so high? You’d not get all results either way. And like I said, personally I don’t see the benefit of showing more than 30 but less than 251 results.
I don’t want to make this a discussion about the number though, and rather remain focused on the actual improvements to search.
Have a nice day
Yaisog