On Sun, 2005-11-06 at 04:12 +0100, Martin Jeppesen wrote: > > What the search box does in limit what is shown in the entry view and > > what is played. Using a temporarily visible box for this wouldn't be > > good, because it would no longer be obvious that the list of tracks is > > being limited, and anything you add to indicate that it is being limited > > will probably take up as much space as the search box did. > > I would say that the Search Entry is more a filter/pattern matching > entry. To me a search high lights the finding, where a filter/pattern > matching shows only the result. The search box does act as a filter rather than searching, but "search" is a more easily word by non-technical people (and is probably easier to translate too). Making it more obvious that it is actually doing filtering would be good, but it shouldn't be intrusive. > Imagine the Search Entry is gone and type ahead is disabled. > > When Rhythmbox is started the status bar reads: > 1000 songs, 500 minuts, 4000MB. > > When typing something the statusbar updates on the fly to e.g. > 5 songs, 15 minuts, 30MB matching metallica. That sounds useful, and it could display what Rhythmbox is actually searching for rather than what is entered in the search box, which can be subtly different. While Rhythmbox has done case-folding (converting to lower case) for a long time, it also recently started ignoring punctuation. > Advantages: > * No Search Entry is required. > * The Stausbar shows the real current status. > * Useful when CD burning is implanted. In a cross-subthread tangent, with cd-burning on the toolbar it is obvious that you should always be able to use it, not just for playlists. My feelings are that it should burn whatever is currenly visible in the track listing (whether a playlist, limited by browser/search box or whatever). I'll have a look at doing this in an updated toolbar patch, once we make decisions on that idea. > Disadvanges: > * The type ahead would probably need to be removed, or an option in > Edit->Preferences could be added: > > _Default keyboard behaviour_ > (*) Filter / pattern matching > ( ) Type ahead search > ( ) None > > I have a feeling that the two can somehow live together at the same time... Why have "none"? The only difference between that and type-ahead is that if you accidentally press a key it won't scroll up/down to find it, which I can't imagine is too much of a problem I don't know about others, but I quite regularly use both. It happens when I'm using the search box as a filter to play a subset of tracks, and I want to find a particular song to play. That would also be a typical "add a preference, because we can't make a decision" preference. One problem that I see with a non-permanent filter entry, is that it makes it hard to fix typos or make minor changes to what you have entered. On an semi-related note, I've found some problems with the change that made it reset the search box when you change sources. If you are using it to limit what it plays from, and then look at a different source, it starts playing from everything. While I think that search box entries shouldn't be kept between sessions, I don't think we should reset them when you look at a different source. What does everyone else think? Cheers, James "Doc" Livingston -- You can lead an idiot to knowledge but you cannot make him think. You can, however, rectally insert the information, printed on stone tablets, using a sharpened poker. -- Nicolai in asr
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part