[Feature Request] Complex Selection Screen

[risalt]

Hi,
Although the full text search is very useful, for big collections it is interesting to search items fulfilling specific criteria. Ideally one should be able to search items based on a dynamic set of fields (each field any of the attributes/datums/tags of any item).
Thanks!

[PerpSearch]

This would be a very useful feature for me. The search capabilities the program has right now are very impressive, but a complex field specific search is atop of my wish list right next to data export.

[benjaminjonard]

Hi, could you give me some examples of searches you'd like to do ?

[PerpSearch]

My use case is antique photography so for example I have tintype, ambrotypes, and daguerreotypes with 18 different data fields. It would be nice to be able to pull up all the daguerreotypes that have an oval mat and a hallmark, or any ambrotype taken in landscape (orientation) that have a child in the photo. To be able to search on multiple data points would be phenomenal. [image: 2025-01-14_190609.jpg]

…

On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 6:13 PM Benjamin Jonard ***@***.***> wrote: Hi, could you give me some examples of searches you'd like to do ? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#1276 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AV6KCRZ7IST2WX4F4ETURHT2KWKYRAVCNFSM6AAAAABU6QWEL2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDKOJRGI4TIMRVHA> . You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[PerpSearch]

It didn't look like that image came through

[benjaminjonard]

I'm considering multiple ways to implement this. All have their advantages and drawbacks :

• Using a specific syntax like tag=Child AND (data:Mat Shape=Oval OR data:Pose=Seated)
  It would be relatively easy to implement as there is no new interface to develop. However it is not user-friendly, users will need to learn that syntax.

• Adding checkbox filters on the left like Amazon does. I personally don't like this one because it would work great on small collections but not on larger ones with a lot of different data. It would also not be possible to have complex queries with 'AND' and 'OR' conditions.

• Adding a new "Advanced search page" with some kind of query builder like this :

This would be by far the most powerful way to do it, but quite complex to implement and also maybe to use. Ideally we could also save searches in the database with a name so we could easily reuse them later.

[risalt]

Thanks Charley for the example!

Benjamin, I was doing some homework on the topic, I have seen that there are bundles that may help in this, Form Filter Bundle looks good for instance. I was also thinking about the user interface, below you have a very complex/aspirational solution, but simpler things would also be an improvement compared to the current situation.

The idea behind the prototype dialog is that it allows adding conditions, each condition has:

• A name: which is the name of the datum to which the condition applies.
• A type: the type of the datum.
• A logical operator: for numeric/date types: =, >=, <=, <, <>; for text-based types: Contains, Does not contain, Equal, Different; for checkboxes: Set, Not set; for multimedia fields: Exists/Does not exist.
• A value: The value of the field. Not relevant for checkboxes or multimedia fields.

Thanks!

Robert.

[risalt]

Oh, I see we have written at the same time 😲
I think your third option is quite aligned with my proposal above, and I do agree that it's quite complex. Your first option would also work for me, as I'm used to databases and SQL, but maybe has a steeper learning curve. Maybe with a lateral selector to choose fields and operations (like phpMyAdmin does) it would be fine and probably still easier than the full dialog.

[PerpSearch]

This is great! Since everybody here knows more about coding than I do, probably the best I can offer is to get out of the way. I can work with any with any solution, but ideally your third option would be my preference since it looks highly functional and easy to use. A feature like saving frequently used searches would be a bonus, but I can imagine how difficult it might be to develop. I can see another advantage to your third option and that would be a future enhancement that would allow a search result to be exported as a CVS file solving another problem.  That said, I can work with any of your options and fully appreciate all the work you put into this. Charley

…

On Jan 15, 2025, 8:09 AM -0500, Benjamin Jonard ***@***.***>, wrote: I'm considering multiple ways to implement this. All have their advantages and drawbacks : • > Using a specific syntax like tag=Child AND (data:Mat Shape=Oval OR data:Pose=Seated) It would be relatively easy to implement as there is no new interface to develop. However it is not user-friendly, users will need to learn that syntax. • > Adding checkbox filters on the left like Amazon does. I personally don't like this one because it would work great on small collections but not on larger ones with a lot of different data. It would also not be possible to have complex queries with 'AND' and 'OR' conditions. • > Adding a new "Advanced search page" with some kind of query builder like this : Screenshot.from.2025-01-15.13-48-31.png (view on web) This would be by far the most powerful way to do it, but quite complex to implement and also maybe to use. Ideally we could also save searches in the database with a name so we could easily reuse them later. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe. You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[benjaminjonard]

A first version of this new search is available in 1.6.3 (the docker image should be available in around 30 minutes)

It includes :

• Search in item name
• Search in item data
• Possibility to have multiple filters
• AND and OR conditions
• Operators : =,<, <=, >, >=, contains
• Possibility to save searches in database

I'll publish some improvements in the next release:

• Filter on tags
• Filter on collections
• Maybe some other operators like empty, exists...

Limitations (for now)

• The search cannot be shared with other users
• Can't search in price fields

This is kind of a draft version so feedback is welcome 🙂

[PerpSearch]

I have 1.6.3 up and running. No surprises which is always a good thing. I have yet to be able to identify any changes between 1.6.2 and 1.6.3 as yet, but I keep looking around.

Thanks for all your hard work.
C

[risalt]

Moved to new item #1289