DonationCoder.com Software > N.A.N.Y. 2009
NANY 2009 Release: Keyser
ewemoa:
I got a little confused with "choose the result" as there isn't a result list from the search, just which search to choose.
-Perry Mowbray (December 12, 2008, 03:24 PM)
--- End quote ---
Aha. I have updated the README.txt to try to be a bit clearer. Thanks for mentioning this.
I thought there was a way in FARR to add to the search field? When I select one of the search items, it does not add the websearchname to the string in FARR (which would be very useful), it opens the search page.
--- End quote ---
Let me see if I understand appropriately. Suppose that the following steps are taken:
1. Bring up FARR
2. Type 'ks' (w/o the quotes)
3. Select one of the results
What happens now is that the selected web search is opened - since no query term has been specified the result of the action may not be viewed as all that useful. IIUC, the suggestion is that instead of what happens now, FARR's text field should get updated w/ the name of the web search followed by a colon. Subsequently, one may enter a query term and proceed w/ a search.
Does that seem like a fair understanding?
It's not possible to use the results from xml? for example the firefox search can return an xml file from: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/search/rss/?q=context+search
--- End quote ---
Do I understand correctly that the suggestion is to have the results from performing the web search appear in the results window of FARR?
Perry Mowbray:
Let me see if I understand appropriately. Suppose that the following steps are taken:
1. Bring up FARR
2. Type 'ks' (w/o the quotes)
3. Select one of the results
What happens now is that the selected web search is opened - since no query term has been specified the result of the action may not be viewed as all that useful. IIUC, the suggestion is that instead of what happens now, FARR's text field should get updated w/ the name of the web search followed by a colon. Subsequently, one may enter a query term and proceed w/ a search.
Does that seem like a fair understanding?
-ewemoa (December 14, 2008, 03:24 AM)
--- End quote ---
Yes: that's it exactly!
Is that possible, I thought that was part of FARR functionality?
Also, if you've forgotten the text string that has to be used in the query, it would be neat to have that text string included somewhere (as a reminder).
It's not possible to use the results from xml? for example the firefox search can return an xml file from: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/search/rss/?q=context+search
--- End quote ---
Do I understand correctly that the suggestion is to have the results from performing the web search appear in the results window of FARR?
-ewemoa (December 14, 2008, 03:24 AM)
--- End quote ---
Yes: you are either very clever or we're on the same wavelength ;)
I thought that this would be very handy, but I guess it would require knowledge of the xml results url?
ewemoa:
Yes: that's it exactly!
Is that possible, I thought that was part of FARR functionality?
-Perry Mowbray (December 14, 2008, 04:27 AM)
--- End quote ---
It might be. I haven't thought through how it might be done. On the one hand it does seem like friendlier behavior to me -- on the other hand, that's not how SokuGin behaves currently (which is one of the things I've been using as a model of behavior). I would be inclined to try to do this if I could make SokuGin do the same :)
Also, if you've forgotten the text string that has to be used in the query, it would be neat to have that text string included somewhere (as a reminder).
--- End quote ---
Is the suggestion here about giving a reminder as to what the syntax is for using the plugin?
Yes: you are either very clever or we're on the same wavelength ;)
--- End quote ---
Well, there is at least one more possibility -- I remember there is a phrase like "Every dog has his day" and in this case, it might apply to me being canine-like today.
I thought that this would be very handy, but I guess it would require knowledge of the xml results url?
--- End quote ---
There are a number of potential issues IIUC. One is that I don't think that every place that has an OpenSearch plugin provides results in XML format (a guess). Another is that a number of search-providing places take a dim view of scraping their search results (e.g. the last time I checked, Google wasn't crazy about this w/o one jumping through a bunch of hoops which I'm not sure are practical to jump through and I'm not sure I'd want to either). Yet another is, to accomplish this, it seems that one would end up having to custom-process results from each different search provider. There may be more, but this margin post may be too narrow to contain them ;)
Perry Mowbray:
Also, if you've forgotten the text string that has to be used in the query, it would be neat to have that text string included somewhere (as a reminder).
--- End quote ---
Is the suggestion here about giving a reminder as to what the syntax is for using the plugin?
-ewemoa (December 14, 2008, 05:06 AM)
--- End quote ---
Yep; which I guess is also the object of the previous suggestion :)
Yes: you are either very clever or we're on the same wavelength ;)
--- End quote ---
Well, there is at least one more possibility -- I remember there is a phrase like "Every dog has his day" and in this case, it might apply to me being canine-like today.
-ewemoa (December 14, 2008, 05:06 AM)
--- End quote ---
I'm pretty sure that's more in reference to being "Top Dog", which I think is kinda appropriate for this Plugin: the more I play with it the more I like it!!
I thought that this would be very handy, but I guess it would require knowledge of the xml results url?
--- End quote ---
There are a number of potential issues IIUC. One is that I don't think that every place that has an OpenSearch plugin provides results in XML format (a guess). Another is that a number of search-providing places take a dim view of scraping their search results (e.g. the last time I checked, Google wasn't crazy about this w/o one jumping through a bunch of hoops which I'm not sure are practical to jump through and I'm not sure I'd want to either). Yet another is, to accomplish this, it seems that one would end up having to custom-process results from each different search provider. There may be more, but this margin post may be too narrow to contain them ;)
-ewemoa (December 14, 2008, 05:06 AM)
--- End quote ---
Yes, I don't disagree with you at all (in general I would have thought that the results url would not be part of the OS definition, and so couldn't be incorporated in your Plugin [a guess]), but also, I'd think that if a site provides an xml view of a search result then that is not scraping their results at all. But I'm not certain and happy to be corrected :-\
ewemoa:
Also, if you've forgotten the text string that has to be used in the query, it would be neat to have that text string included somewhere (as a reminder).
--- End quote ---
Is the suggestion here about giving a reminder as to what the syntax is for using the plugin?
-ewemoa (December 14, 2008, 05:06 AM)
--- End quote ---
Yep
-Perry Mowbray (December 14, 2008, 06:36 AM)
--- End quote ---
Although I may be mistaken, I have this vague memory that there might be some upcoming changes to FARR that make it easier to get help on the currently functioning plugin. I'm thinking that may be I can leverage those when they come about. I agree it would be good to quickly find out what the syntax is -- I just don't currently have what I consider a good way to achieve this. The key is the word "somewhere" in the original suggestion ;)
Yes, I don't disagree with you at all (in general I would have thought that the results url would not be part of the OS definition, and so couldn't be incorporated in your Plugin [a guess])
--- End quote ---
I may be mistaken about this, but I was under the impression that the specification provides something along these lines, but it is optional (I believe there is something about RSS and something about Atom for returning results).
I'd think that if a site provides an xml view of a search result then that is not scraping their results at all. But I'm not certain and happy to be corrected :-\
--- End quote ---
It has been a while since I checked, but IIRC in Google's case there was quite a bit on this [1] -- including having a "key" to make use of their XML results.
I didn't mention another potential technical issue -- in theory it sounds neat to be able to work w/ results inside FARR, in practice though, imagine what happens after you request that a search is performed. You end up waiting -- and while you are waiting, if FARR is involved, it makes it difficult to use FARR for something else (as I understand it, FARR isn't designed to work on multiple tasks simultaneously, especially if they all involve the FARR window). I think letting a web browser handle the request works out ok for the most part -- I usually want to view the individual result pages in a web browser (perhaps I am missing use cases you have in mind -- would you mind elaborating a bit on this point?). Also, it's harder to revisit the lists of results from inside FARR whereas w/ a web browser I find this is much easier (especially w/ tabs and opening recently closed ones).
[1] http://www.google.com/accounts/TOS
http://www.google.com/apps/intl/en/terms/api_terms.html
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version