on the way to BT 1.6 (was: [bt-devel] Search Dialog Update)

[David Blue (Mailing List Addy)]

On Sunday 22 January 2006 16:59, Joachim Ansorg wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> > > I suggest that we try to finalize 1.6 asap. Perhaps we can release a
> > > beta soon for people to test it more thorough. What remains to be done?
> >
> > I think the word that matched the strongs # should be highlighted in the
> > results (if that's not already done) I played with it earlier, and I
> > searched for a strongs # and got results but couldn't tell which word it
> > was.
>
> This is done already, I think.

It is, sorry my mistake.

> > Also, disabling strongs serach for modules without strongs in them
> > would be good on a usability standpoint
>
> Strongs search is now done with a prefix before the number, so there's no
> seperate search for strongs anymore.
> But we should care for usability. What would you suggest to make it easy to
> use?

I was referring to the context menu within the module, not the search dialog. 
Sorry, should've clarified. 

With my current build, which I just did via cvs up -d then make && su -c 'make 
uninstall && make install', the behavior of the context menu is that there is 
an option below search called "strong's search" what it does is open the 
search dialog with the strongs number of the word your mouse is over already 
there in the proper format for searching. Which is wonderful, if you're on a 
word with a strong's # attached. If you're in something other than a bible 
(or strongs lexicon) or on a module or non-word (verse #, margin, space 
between lines/words, foot note, etc) It brings up a search dialog with 
nothing pre-filled.

This is counter-intuitive behavior. I know I at first thought it wasn't 
working or I was doing something wrong (since I was expecting a different 
dialog), so I checked with a module with strongs, and discovered the expected 
behavior. One option would be to remove the context menu option all-together, 
I personally don't like this one as it is actually a useful feature when 
presented properly.

I would personally say that the menu should read, and/or bring up information 
indicating that this module doesn't have strong's #s. I definitely think that 
if clicked it should bring up a dialog indicating that the module should be 
checked, via "about this work", to make sure that it does support strong's #s 
before filing a report. Otherwise, we'll end up in the same situation as we 
would if we disable or remove the option for modules without strong's #s. 
Which is, we'll get reports of it not being enabled or present and then have 
to determine whether or not the module even has support, or if it's our bug. 
I think we would get similar reports if we leave it as is as well.

On a side-note, I think we should definitely get an icon for the menu entry.