On 20 Mar 2013, at 20:53, Olemis Lang <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 3/20/13, Joachim Dreimann <[email protected]> wrote:
> [...]
>> On 14 March 2013 19:47, Andrej Golcov <[email protected]> wrote:
> [...]
>>> We can set default product filter based on active product and use
>>> global search if user navigates directly to global search url - I
>>> think, Olemis suggested something like this.
>> 
>> I believe search should always be global unless the user chooses otherwise.
> 
> what does this mean exactly ? Let's focus on the following situation .
> User reads let's say a wiki page in product P and searches for word W
> by using search input box in the header . In your opinion is there any
> value for getting results from other projects , even potentially not
> provide any result for the active project ?

Yes. Given your scenario:

- If the user was reading the page it may have reminded her of W in another 
product (or user is uncertain about the product it's in), not retrieving that 
information = bad (initially the user may even think it doesn't exist at all)
- The user may have just had the page open from reading earlier, but coming 
back to the tab now after an hour she may be looking for something unrelated = 
bad
- The same action (search) having changing scope without an explicit user 
action seems bad

The first two are common use cases for me and ones I often see others do. I may 
suffer from confirmation bias here though so do let me know if that's not your 
experience.

There's a stronger argument for me though, and I'd love to see log data to 
prove or disprove it. I believe most searches are navigational, essentially to 
named objects that users have seen or interacted with in the past, or that they 
know about by other means. Users tend to find these through query negotiation 
by refining their query to narrow it down, but crucially rarely to broaden it 
unless they have high certainty that it exists and high determination to get 
there. We need to design for people for whom that's not the case, that means 
full scope by default to me.

Don't mistake that for me being certain, I would much prefer to test both 
approaches with users. If you think that's feasible I may be able to set up 
such a test.

Cheers,
Joe

> 
> That's more than confusing afaict ; unless the user explicitly checks
> a selector to search anywhere ... that's another subject ;)
> 
>> Our ranking should ensure that most relevant items move towards the top,
>> and a data point for this could be recently viewed products.
> 
> I agree with this when it comes to explicit global search view .
> 
> [...]
> 
> -- 
> Regards,
> 
> Olemis.

Reply via email to