It is true that after selecting Px=A, you will still see A listed in Py. And also that clicking on A in Py will have zero impact because _all_ items in the active set will have Py=A at that point. However, every _other_ value listed in Py will be meaningful; in particular if they click on Py=B then the active set will narrow to items with values A _and_ B on property Px (=Py). So, you get an interface where they can continue to filter; it just has one "meaningless" entry A.
I suppose one could argue for "simplifying" any facet by leaving out any value that is tied to _every_ element in the active set---that would fix this one pathological case, and might even be useful for less pathological scenarios: for example, after I narrow my recipes down to "ingredient contains chili peppers" it might be pointless for my "flavors" facet to still contain "spicy" as an option. Jun Zhao wrote: > Hi David, > > No, I am not sure about this. If I have an item I1, and has two > properties Px, Py, where Py is a copy of Px but with a different name, > then I should have: > > I1 Px A > I1 Py A > I1 Px B > I1 Py B > > When I select Px=A for I1, then in the facet of Py, I should still see > the value of B AND A, because item I1's property Py has the values of A > and B. But in facet Py, I don't want to show the "A" to the users, but > only the "B", to help them to continue to filter their records. > > That's my understanding about how the facet browsing works in Exhibit. > Please correct me if I am wrong or I misinterpreted what you meant as > making a copy of the property > > Thanks, > > Jun > > David Karger wrote: > >> Well, if you want to carry the hack further, make a copy of the property >> and give it a different name. Then create a facet on the copied >> property. Since it is a different facet it will get filtered against >> the first. >> >> Jun Zhao wrote: >> >> >>> Hi David, >>> >>> Thank you for your prompt answer. >>> >>> I have tried this. However, this gets confusing if users want to >>> construct an AND in two steps. The second facet will not get filtered >>> when you make a selection in the first facet, because they are copies of >>> one another. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Jun >>> >>> >>> David Karger wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> One hack that seems to work is to create two copies of the same >>>> facet---then you get a conjunction of what is selected within each. >>>> This isn't as elegant as AND over a single facet, but it is more >>>> powerful because you can AND two separate "ORs", as in selecting color >>>> "red or green" AND "blue or yellow". >>>> >>>> Jun Zhao wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Hello there, >>>>> >>>>> Now in Exhibit if I select multiple conditions in one facet, I will get >>>>> everything that satisfies any of the filtering conditions. I am >>>>> wondering whether there is anyway I can make these multiple conditions >>>>> conjunctive, to get me everything that needs to satisfy all the >>>>> filtering conditions. >>>>> >>>>> Many thanks, >>>>> >>>>> Jun >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> General mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://simile.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/general >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> General mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://simile.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/general >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> General mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://simile.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/general >>> >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> General mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://simile.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/general >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > General mailing list > [email protected] > http://simile.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/general > _______________________________________________ General mailing list [email protected] http://simile.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/general
