Login  Register

Searches done by default

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
23 messages Options Options
Embed post
Permalink
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
| More
Print post
Permalink

Re: Searches done by default

Pierre Smits
2270 posts
Hi Jacques,

I agree too. Showing all contact mech details in a hover would enhance user
experience. But is all about real estate. If room is available I would like
to see some contact mech details on the same line as the name of the contact
(eg. phone number and/or email address).

Regards,

Pierre

2009/10/26 Jacques Le Roux <[hidden email]>

> For instance I found the "I" (Information) icon a good idea in SugarCRM.
> It only shows contact's contact mechs details on an hover over the icon,
> but it's convenient.
> It's all about improving users experience, they really like it (don't you ?
> ;o)
>
> Jacques
>
> From: "Pierre Smits" <[hidden email]>
>
> Showing default search results is one thing. Enhancing (combining) search
> posibilities is another. It is al about clicks.....
>
> Why not have search screens combined (by default) so that users experience
> an enhanced ease of use. E.g. in party (account, employee, etc) combine the
> search on party name (first name and/or last name) with details from
> contact
> mechs (e.g. country or postal code) beside showing advanced search
> possibilities.
>
> And as far as SugarCRM goes: they have found a nack to deliver what
> customers want, which among others is an ease of use. So, why not steal
> with
> pride and improve.
>
> Regards,
>
> Pierre
>
> PS I did not actually intend to promote theft.
>
> E.g in one screen
> 2009/10/26 Scott Gray <[hidden email]>
>
>  BTW I think the absolute best thing we could do to improve search
>> usability
>> is to implement saved searches without a doubt.
>>
>> Regards
>> Scott
>>
>>
>> On 26/10/2009, at 10:37 PM, Scott Gray wrote:
>>
>>  I was just trying to point out that it's usefulness decreases
>>
>>> exponentially as the number of pages in the result set increases (i.e.
>>> the
>>> likelihood that you will find what you are looking for on the first
>>> page).
>>>  IMO it only really makes sense when the list is ordered by the newest
>>> record first such as orders, tasks, emails, etc.
>>>
>>> I personally don't really care either way, I just feel that the effort
>>> required to make it configurable outweighs the benefits.  If the list
>>> should
>>> show results then just show them and if it shouldn't then don't, why
>>> bother
>>> with all the extra work of making it configurable just because the
>>> developers disagree on which is the best approach.
>>>
>>> BTW, SugarCRM is one of many popular CRM suites out there and I don't
>>> think that just because they do something a certain way makes that
>>> approach
>>> the best one :-)
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Scott
>>>
>>> HotWax Media
>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>
>>> On 26/10/2009, at 9:34 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>
>>>  Scott,
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I did not find enough time for that. This idea cames to me after a short
>>>> test of SugarCRM last version.
>>>> I think we could show results by default in SFA at least. There should
>>>> not be too much results, and with the new length parameter Bruno is
>>>> working
>>>> on, this should improve user experience.
>>>> This because it seems that some decision-makers began to look at OFBiz
>>>> from the CRM/SFA perspective.
>>>> We should take care of their expericen, most of the time they decide of
>>>> our future...
>>>>
>>>> Jacques
>>>>
>>>> From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]>
>>>>
>>>>  From: "Scott Gray" <[hidden email]>
>>>>>
>>>>>  Could you provide an example search form where this might be useful?
>>>>>> Perhaps talking about specific forms might be more helpful.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> I will try tomorrow to explain why, I must admit I have not yet
>>>>> considered the how
>>>>>
>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>
>>>>>  I have no problem with OFBiz being set one way or the other but making
>>>>>
>>>>>>  it configurable seems like a lot for little return.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>> Scott
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 13/10/2009, at 10:37 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  Not only people evaluating OFBiz, but also people dealing with small
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  numbers. Maybe this should not be applied to all searches, though.
>>>>>>> Remember, OFBiz was set this way not so long ago.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> From: "Scott Gray" <[hidden email]>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  -1, that sounds like a lot of work and additional complexity and
>>>>>>>>  for
>>>>>>>>  what? So that people evaluating OFBiz don't have to click on a
>>>>>>>>  search
>>>>>>>>  button in order to do a search?  I'm sorry but it really  makes no
>>>>>>>>  sense
>>>>>>>> to me.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>> Scott
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> HotWax Media
>>>>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 13/10/2009, at 9:51 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  Also in the case of searching by default, the search fields  should
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  be visible (it's no obvious as it's only a string in the screenlet
>>>>>>>>>  title)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> OOTB, we decided to not do searches by default when a page
>>>>>>>>>> containing one is opened (I was for this decision)
>>>>>>>>>> I wonder if we should not parametrize this in the DB and let it
>>>>>>>>>> available in the "My Portal" Préférences ?
>>>>>>>>>> Then we could set it to yes by default and avoid people
>>>>>>>>>>  evaluating
>>>>>>>>>>  OFBiz to clic on search button each time they open a such page.
>>>>>>>>>> We could also have an URL going to the preferences in each  search
>>>>>>>>>>  to allow a quick change if needed
>>>>>>>>>> This is not related to lookup dialog boxes but only searches in
>>>>>>>>>> plain pages.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> What do you think ?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
| More
Print post
Permalink

Re: Searches done by default

Pierre Smits
2270 posts
In reply to this post by Adrian Crum
Hi Adrian,

I looked at the widgets.properties file in /framework/widget/config and
found:
widget.defaultNoConditionFind=N

I set it to
widget.defaultNoConditionFind=Y
*
*
But when starting up my Ofbiz I did not see any changes. Does changing the
value of this parameter require a rebuild?

When I access opportunities in the browsers I immediately see the existing
opportunities just below the search segment. Whereas when I access accounts
in the browser I only see the search segment.
Furthermore I looked in to two screens in the SFA module (accountscreens.xml
and opportunityscreens.xml). I see two different approaches.. Shouldn't
these be then in sync as to facilitating the parameter setting in
widget.properties?

Regards,

Pierre

2009/10/26 Adrian Crum <[hidden email]>

> Just a quick reminder: displaying the search results by default is already
> configurable on a per-server basis. Look in widgets.properties for the
> setting.
>
> Saving search criteria would be easy using the user preferences feature.
> Just use the name of the search criteria container as a key, and use the
> parameters as the value.
>
> -Adrian
>
>
> Bruno Busco wrote:
>
>> Implementing "saved searches" or what I was used to call "filters" is
>> on my wish list.
>> I like how jira implements them allowing private or shared/global filters.
>>
>> I would like to share info and requirements about.
>>
>> -Bruno
>>
>> 2009/10/26 Scott Gray <[hidden email]>:
>>
>>> BTW I think the absolute best thing we could do to improve search
>>> usability
>>> is to implement saved searches without a doubt.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Scott
>>>
>>> On 26/10/2009, at 10:37 PM, Scott Gray wrote:
>>>
>>>  I was just trying to point out that it's usefulness decreases
>>>> exponentially as the number of pages in the result set increases (i.e.
>>>> the
>>>> likelihood that you will find what you are looking for on the first
>>>> page).
>>>>  IMO it only really makes sense when the list is ordered by the newest
>>>> record first such as orders, tasks, emails, etc.
>>>>
>>>> I personally don't really care either way, I just feel that the effort
>>>> required to make it configurable outweighs the benefits.  If the list
>>>> should
>>>> show results then just show them and if it shouldn't then don't, why
>>>> bother
>>>> with all the extra work of making it configurable just because the
>>>> developers disagree on which is the best approach.
>>>>
>>>> BTW, SugarCRM is one of many popular CRM suites out there and I don't
>>>> think that just because they do something a certain way makes that
>>>> approach
>>>> the best one :-)
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Scott
>>>>
>>>> HotWax Media
>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>
>>>> On 26/10/2009, at 9:34 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>
>>>>  Scott,
>>>>>
>>>>> I did not find enough time for that. This idea cames to me after a
>>>>> short
>>>>> test of SugarCRM last version.
>>>>> I think we could show results by default in SFA at least. There should
>>>>> not be too much results, and with the new length parameter Bruno is
>>>>> working
>>>>> on, this should improve user experience.
>>>>> This because it seems that some decision-makers began to look at OFBiz
>>>>> from the CRM/SFA perspective.
>>>>> We should take care of their expericen, most of the time they decide of
>>>>> our future...
>>>>>
>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>
>>>>> From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]>
>>>>>
>>>>>> From: "Scott Gray" <[hidden email]>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Could you provide an example search form where this might be useful?
>>>>>>> Perhaps talking about specific forms might be more helpful.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I will try tomorrow to explain why, I must admit I have not yet
>>>>>> considered the how
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  I have no problem with OFBiz being set one way or the other but
>>>>>>> making
>>>>>>>  it configurable seems like a lot for little return.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>> Scott
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 13/10/2009, at 10:37 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  Not only people evaluating OFBiz, but also people dealing with small
>>>>>>>>  numbers. Maybe this should not be applied to all searches, though.
>>>>>>>> Remember, OFBiz was set this way not so long ago.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> From: "Scott Gray" <[hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -1, that sounds like a lot of work and additional complexity and
>>>>>>>>>  for
>>>>>>>>>  what? So that people evaluating OFBiz don't have to click on a
>>>>>>>>>  search
>>>>>>>>>  button in order to do a search?  I'm sorry but it really  makes no
>>>>>>>>>  sense
>>>>>>>>> to me.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>>> Scott
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> HotWax Media
>>>>>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 13/10/2009, at 9:51 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  Also in the case of searching by default, the search fields
>>>>>>>>>>  should
>>>>>>>>>>  be visible (it's no obvious as it's only a string in the
>>>>>>>>>> screenlet  title)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> OOTB, we decided to not do searches by default when a page
>>>>>>>>>>> containing one is opened (I was for this decision)
>>>>>>>>>>> I wonder if we should not parametrize this in the DB and let it
>>>>>>>>>>> available in the "My Portal" Préférences ?
>>>>>>>>>>> Then we could set it to yes by default and avoid people
>>>>>>>>>>>  evaluating
>>>>>>>>>>>  OFBiz to clic on search button each time they open a such page.
>>>>>>>>>>> We could also have an URL going to the preferences in each
>>>>>>>>>>>  search
>>>>>>>>>>>  to allow a quick change if needed
>>>>>>>>>>> This is not related to lookup dialog boxes but only searches in
>>>>>>>>>>> plain pages.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think ?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
| More
Print post
Permalink

Re: Searches done by default

Adrian Crum
2435 posts
Changing the property setting does not require rebuilding the project.
The setting will only work on lists that are created using the
performFind service.

-Adrian

Pierre Smits wrote:

> Hi Adrian,
>
> I looked at the widgets.properties file in /framework/widget/config and
> found:
> widget.defaultNoConditionFind=N
>
> I set it to
> widget.defaultNoConditionFind=Y
> *
> *
> But when starting up my Ofbiz I did not see any changes. Does changing the
> value of this parameter require a rebuild?
>
> When I access opportunities in the browsers I immediately see the existing
> opportunities just below the search segment. Whereas when I access accounts
> in the browser I only see the search segment.
> Furthermore I looked in to two screens in the SFA module (accountscreens.xml
> and opportunityscreens.xml). I see two different approaches.. Shouldn't
> these be then in sync as to facilitating the parameter setting in
> widget.properties?
>
> Regards,
>
> Pierre
>
> 2009/10/26 Adrian Crum <[hidden email]>
>
>> Just a quick reminder: displaying the search results by default is already
>> configurable on a per-server basis. Look in widgets.properties for the
>> setting.
>>
>> Saving search criteria would be easy using the user preferences feature.
>> Just use the name of the search criteria container as a key, and use the
>> parameters as the value.
>>
>> -Adrian
>>
>>
>> Bruno Busco wrote:
>>
>>> Implementing "saved searches" or what I was used to call "filters" is
>>> on my wish list.
>>> I like how jira implements them allowing private or shared/global filters.
>>>
>>> I would like to share info and requirements about.
>>>
>>> -Bruno
>>>
>>> 2009/10/26 Scott Gray <[hidden email]>:
>>>
>>>> BTW I think the absolute best thing we could do to improve search
>>>> usability
>>>> is to implement saved searches without a doubt.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Scott
>>>>
>>>> On 26/10/2009, at 10:37 PM, Scott Gray wrote:
>>>>
>>>>  I was just trying to point out that it's usefulness decreases
>>>>> exponentially as the number of pages in the result set increases (i.e.
>>>>> the
>>>>> likelihood that you will find what you are looking for on the first
>>>>> page).
>>>>>  IMO it only really makes sense when the list is ordered by the newest
>>>>> record first such as orders, tasks, emails, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> I personally don't really care either way, I just feel that the effort
>>>>> required to make it configurable outweighs the benefits.  If the list
>>>>> should
>>>>> show results then just show them and if it shouldn't then don't, why
>>>>> bother
>>>>> with all the extra work of making it configurable just because the
>>>>> developers disagree on which is the best approach.
>>>>>
>>>>> BTW, SugarCRM is one of many popular CRM suites out there and I don't
>>>>> think that just because they do something a certain way makes that
>>>>> approach
>>>>> the best one :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> Scott
>>>>>
>>>>> HotWax Media
>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>>
>>>>> On 26/10/2009, at 9:34 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>  Scott,
>>>>>> I did not find enough time for that. This idea cames to me after a
>>>>>> short
>>>>>> test of SugarCRM last version.
>>>>>> I think we could show results by default in SFA at least. There should
>>>>>> not be too much results, and with the new length parameter Bruno is
>>>>>> working
>>>>>> on, this should improve user experience.
>>>>>> This because it seems that some decision-makers began to look at OFBiz
>>>>>> from the CRM/SFA perspective.
>>>>>> We should take care of their expericen, most of the time they decide of
>>>>>> our future...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> From: "Scott Gray" <[hidden email]>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Could you provide an example search form where this might be useful?
>>>>>>>> Perhaps talking about specific forms might be more helpful.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I will try tomorrow to explain why, I must admit I have not yet
>>>>>>> considered the how
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  I have no problem with OFBiz being set one way or the other but
>>>>>>>> making
>>>>>>>>  it configurable seems like a lot for little return.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>> Scott
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 13/10/2009, at 10:37 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  Not only people evaluating OFBiz, but also people dealing with small
>>>>>>>>>  numbers. Maybe this should not be applied to all searches, though.
>>>>>>>>> Remember, OFBiz was set this way not so long ago.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> From: "Scott Gray" <[hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -1, that sounds like a lot of work and additional complexity and
>>>>>>>>>>  for
>>>>>>>>>>  what? So that people evaluating OFBiz don't have to click on a
>>>>>>>>>>  search
>>>>>>>>>>  button in order to do a search?  I'm sorry but it really  makes no
>>>>>>>>>>  sense
>>>>>>>>>> to me.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>>>> Scott
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> HotWax Media
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 13/10/2009, at 9:51 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  Also in the case of searching by default, the search fields
>>>>>>>>>>>  should
>>>>>>>>>>>  be visible (it's no obvious as it's only a string in the
>>>>>>>>>>> screenlet  title)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> OOTB, we decided to not do searches by default when a page
>>>>>>>>>>>> containing one is opened (I was for this decision)
>>>>>>>>>>>> I wonder if we should not parametrize this in the DB and let it
>>>>>>>>>>>> available in the "My Portal" Préférences ?
>>>>>>>>>>>> Then we could set it to yes by default and avoid people
>>>>>>>>>>>>  evaluating
>>>>>>>>>>>>  OFBiz to clic on search button each time they open a such page.
>>>>>>>>>>>> We could also have an URL going to the preferences in each
>>>>>>>>>>>>  search
>>>>>>>>>>>>  to allow a quick change if needed
>>>>>>>>>>>> This is not related to lookup dialog boxes but only searches in
>>>>>>>>>>>> plain pages.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>
12