2014-09-26 20:43 GMT+02:00 Cédric Krier <[email protected]>: > On 26 Sep 20:05, Jordi Esteve wrote: >> On 26/09/14 19:35, Cédric Krier wrote: >> >On 26 Sep 18:41, Jordi Esteve wrote: >> >>On 26/09/14 18:08, Albert Cervera i Areny wrote: >> >>>2014-09-26 17:59 GMT+02:00 M. Murray <[email protected]>: >> >>>>Hello Everyone, >> >>>> >> >>>>I have a question regarding the search query builder in the tree view. >> >>>>It is >> >>>>the window that pops up when you click the "Filters" button/label at top >> >>>>left. >> >>>> >> >>>>How can I modify the list of fields that shows in that popup? >> >>>Just change the tree view. You can search on all the fields of the >> >>>view except those that are not searchable (usually calculated fields) >> >>>and the client also adds some special fields such as id, create and >> >>>write date and users. >> >>> >> >>>Note that you can add fields to the view but make them "invisible" so >> >>>they're searchable but are not shown to the user. >> >>Adding filter fields with a more flexible way than changing the tree view >> >>would be a nice feature for Tryton. In my experience, the user wants to >> >>search by a lot of criteria, no only by the fields showed in the tree view. >> >>This requirement is very common in party and product views. >> >> >> >>I don't know if other people has this need and if it would be very >> >>difficult >> >>to implement in the core of Tryton. >> >I'm strongly against, it is a wrong user experience to not show proof of >> >the result of a search. >> > >> >>To fill this shortcoming, we have developed the searching module [1]. It >> >>allows search records with flexible criteria in any Tryton model, subfield >> >>search in m2o-o2m-m2m and store the criteria in a profile to be reused. >> >> >> >>[1] https://bitbucket.org/zikzakmedia/trytond-searching >> >Too bad to not improve the current search syntax because all the >> >features you describe already exist expect for the relation field. >> >> No, it has another more important feature: In the current filter box you can >> not search if the fields are not defined in the tree view, this is the main >> shortcoming that this module tries to solve. > > Better to add the field! This is really stupid to over engineer with a
The problem Jordi tries to address is about the fact that he cannot know in advance what fields the user wants to use for searching. In fact the user doesn't know either until he has the need. We discussed this in the TUB and I think several people were interested in creating a module that allows users to define their own tree views. That would solve the search issue too, with the advantage that the user can check the result, which I agree is important. > not userfriendly at all design, just to add a field on a view. > And more over, you require the user to learn a new query language which > does exactly the same as the current one. > FYI, nothing is needed to be developed to add a field on a view. -- Albert Cervera i Areny Tel. 93 553 18 03 @albertnan www.NaN-tic.com
