[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Adds a site search to website and improves doc search (issue 4894053
Re: Adds a site search to website and improves doc search (issue 4894053)
Fri, 26 Aug 2011 09:15:03 +0100
----- Original Message -----
To: <address@hidden>; <address@hidden>;
<address@hidden>; <address@hidden>; <address@hidden>
Cc: <address@hidden>; <address@hidden>
Sent: Friday, August 26, 2011 5:26 AM
Subject: Re: Adds a site search to website and improves doc search (issue
I have grave doubts about adding a second search box.
1) it makes the top bar uncomfortably squashed in my default web browser
2) it requires users to choose which type of search they want to do.
#1 isn't about me forcing my desktop browser preferences on anybody, but
rather I'm making the point that almost all other websites work well on
my desktop. I think we should be very cautious about making
lilypond.org less accessible than the average websote. (or perhaps I
should specify "average geek website", since I'm sure that certain other
genres of websites are much less accessible than places that I visit)
Do we have any compelling evidence that we _need_ to separate these
searches? Didn't the previous system just search the website and stable
docs; wasn't that sufficient?
No. It doesn't search the website at all. That's the original problem -
there was a report that if you are looking for "frogs" in the search box, it
returns nothing. That's not in any way good. So we need to be able to
search the site. But if you modify the current search to search the site,
then you get lots of hits from non-stable doc information if you're looking
for information in the documentation. Having 2 boxes seemed the best way to
me to overcome this particular problem.
Also, IIRC there was a suggestion that we search for something like
instead of adding +2.14. Am I misremembering / would that work / etc?
Good point. I believe that change that I originally tested got lost in one
of my build nukes.