5 replies to this topic

[Marcher Technologies]

bear with me...
but what if we have fields that have no place in the search results?
such as a publisher, or year?
why is there not an option at the Field level as to whether that field can be searched, as IDM allows?
Just noticed the inline search on a database searches ALL fields if searching is enabled...
field config needed.

[mat206]

Databases are searchable.. sure, but the results look plain terrible as well. Pulling the entire article content and showing it in the results looks absolutely terrible if you have length articles.. it makes search results just about unusable as a feature.

An ideal solution would allow you to:

A) Define a field as searchable by default (so the standard search yields all results based off searching any of those fields)

B) Allow searching in custom fields by key in the results:

&search_app_filters[ccs][searchInKey]=pages&search_app_filters[ccs][pages][sortKey]=date&search_term=content&search_app=ccs&search_app_filters[ccs][searchInKey]=database_9

Add a [searchInFieldKey]=publisher to search 'database_9', field 'publisher' for results - Note that 'publisher' must be a publicly accessible field

C) Create a template per database that defines how results are formatted for that database


(so for the complete package, a database can have a category template, category listing template, record template, form template, and search template)

[Marcher Technologies]

Databases are searchable.. sure, but the results look plain terrible as well. Pulling the entire article content and showing it in the results looks absolutely terrible if you have length articles.. it makes search results just about unusable as a feature.

An ideal solution would allow you to:

A) Define a field as searchable by default (so the standard search yields all results based off searching any of those fields)

B) Allow searching in custom fields by key in the results:

&search_app_filters[ccs][searchInKey]=pages&search_app_filters[ccs][pages][sortKey]=date&search_term=content&search_app=ccs&search_app_filters[ccs][searchInKey]=database_9

Add a [searchInFieldKey]=publisher to search 'database_9', field 'publisher' for results - Note that 'publisher' must be a publicly accessible field

C) Create a template per database that defines how results are formatted for that database


(so for the complete package, a database can have a category template, category listing template, record template, form template, and search template)

Mat, not at all disagreeing, but im also speaking of the inline search ON the database/articles page...
in the case of both, its feasible to twitch a listing for the output formatting(articles uses archives), this is also quite doable on the search system results.
however, I wholeheartedly agree on the above....... Seriously need controls regarding searching fields properly.

[mat206]

Ahh gotcha.

[Tigratrus]

Indeed. This would really make a LOT more sense, and reduce the "noise" in the search results a LOT. I thought it already did it this way as it seems pretty obvious, but that's a matter of perspective. Everything seems obvious to the person that has a use for it... If ya know what I mean.

James

[m3rk0rd]

C) Create a template per database that defines how results are formatted for that database

I agree with this whole-heartedly. What gets displayed in the search results is the record's "title" and "content" fields. Title I'm fine with, but the "content" field should not have to be just one of the database fields. "Content" works well when you have something like a short article teaser paragraph, but what about when you don't have a single field that captures the content of the record. It would be nice if you could build the "content" field yourself, e.g. by combining various other fields.

This same issue applies to RSS feed output from databases. Right now the feed content uses the same "content" field. Again it would be nice if we could customize that output per database.