Thread Filter by AddonsLab [Paid] 3.9.2

[sbj]

I'm not the author but what you're looking for is the difference between a <select> element and <select multiple>. You can find more information here, though it's typically considered better to integrate this via checkboxes depending on your content.

Select multiple would be one way of doing it.
Another way would be repeating/reloading the same dropdown, so let's say after you selected 1 item in dropdown1, under it another dropdown1 would occur, to make another selection possible.

For my case (I'll have hundreds and hundreds of different names) checkboxes are definitely not a good solution. And a select multiple wouldn't be elegant as my described solution, but would suffice I guess.

 

[AddonsLab]

One more question, if it is ok.
Can I see an example of this:


So, if I understand correctly, this only applies to different dropdowns, and not to 1 dropdown, right?

Let's say there is dropdown1 filled with colors and dropdown2 filled with car names.
Now I can select from dropdown1 the color blue and from dropdown2 the car name Ferrari.
So far so good.

But can I select 3 colors from dropdown1? Like, blue, yellow and red and at the same time from dropdown2 Ferrari?

So can I really select multiple-choice from drop downs? I couldn't find an example on the site.

No matter how the original custom field is - single choice or multiple choice (checkbox, radio, select list etc), you end up having items with different values for the same field (e.g. there are cars with colors yellow, blue etc). When filtering/searching the result, you can decide, if you want the users to find the cars by color using multiple colors at once (e.g. find all cars which are yellow OR blue), or only one color at time. And this condition combines with any other custom field filters. In your example, the final condition would be "find cars with (color=yellow OR color=blue) AND name=ferrari".

I see in your second post you mentioned the idea of dependable custom fields, which is not supported by the product yet. We definitely want to implement it, just can't manage due to the load we have with other projects. If you are interested in more rapid development, feel free to contact us to discuss the terms of a funded project.

I'm not the author but what you're looking for is the difference between a <select> element and <select multiple>. You can find more information here, though it's typically considered better to integrate this via checkboxes depending on your content.

[Error] Failed to load resource: the server responded with a status of 404 (HTTP/2.0 404) (jquery-ui.css, line 0)
https://website.com/router-filter/js/XenCentral/Feedback/jquery-ui.css

Experiencing this error under the Feedback Panel on Beta 3. I'm not sure if the router-filter is the issue, or that there is a section pulling jquery-ui.css that isn't pulling from the root directory. I also believe I saw a matching issue with jquery-ui.js at one point but can't trace it now.

I don't think the error reported is related to our product. Please confirm that error disappears if you disable our product.

Thank you!

 

[Yawn]

I don't think the error reported is related to our product. Please confirm that error disappears if you disable our product.

Edit: My apologies, I got mixed up and posted on the wrong thread!

 

[AddonsLab]

I've just disabled the add-on and the error disappeared. Please keep in mind that the file is only being called on pages related to your add-on, so viewing these pages with the add-on disabled simply does not show the page or try to load the resource. The add-on is looking for these files at website.com/router-filter/js/XenCentral/ rather than website.com/js/XenCentral/ for one reason or another. It sounds like there's an accidental ./ at the start of a call somewhere, though I haven't been-able to locate it myself.

The main part of the error seems to be related to "router-filter" word, and it is simply never used in our product. Just do a text search in the product, and if "router-filter" appears there in any way, the issue should come from there.

 

[sbj]

When filtering/searching the result, you can decide, if you want the users to find the cars by color using multiple colors at once (e.g. find all cars which are yellow OR blue), or only one color at time. And this condition combines with any other custom field filters. In your example, the final condition would be "find cars with (color=yellow OR color=blue) AND name=ferrari".

That would be fine. Can I see an example on your test site for this? There are currently no multiple choices, as far as I can see.

I see in your second post you mentioned the idea of dependable custom fields, which is not supported by the product yet.

No, you misunderstood. That was not a dependable custom fields solution. Dependable means the 2nd selection is dependable to the first one and so on. We already established that this is low on your priority list because it would take huge amount of time and development.

No, the idea was basically if you can do an "AND" search between the same field. So this:
(color=yellow AND color=blue) AND name=ferrari".
So basically I would be looking for a Ferrari which is blue and yellow at the same time, and not for ferraris which are blue OR yellow.

If you are interested in more rapid development, feel free to contact us to discuss the terms of a funded project.

Honestly, I once paid a considerable xxx figure for the development of actually the same improvements and I got burned. Since then I learned 1 thing. Either you wait for the dev to make improvements before you buy his product or you don't. If you go the funded way, you pay basically for nothing (cause anyone else gets it for free, but you pay for it) and at the same time you get asked to pay for every little detail. I'm not saying that you are responsible for this or would act the same or whatever, just then realizing that the dev makes no improvements anymore unless you pay him every time, made a bad impression on me. And since your product is not the cheapest (compared to other stuff in the RM), I take the "waiting" route.
But honestly, I am impressed with the rate of answers and development of this product, so can't say nothing bad about you or this product. Hopefully this stays like this. I think the current version is actually worth of buying it with no doubt. I just need a bit more time for myselfe if I can think of a feature I couldn't live without. Just as an example, not having an "AND" search between the same field is not a dealbreaker, but would make a useful case to have it so. Anyway, sorry for being babbling. Have a good day.

 

[AddonsLab]

That would be fine. Can I see an example on your test site for this? There are currently no multiple choices, as far as I can see.

Here is an item with multiple values selected for a field called "Multiple Selection" and only one value selected for the field "Single Selection" - https://xf2.addonslab.com/index.php?threads/libero-est-vel-sagittis.170303/ (feel free to login as admin to edit the item and see the form):



The above fields could also be shown as selection lists (single or multiple selection allowed).

The way these fields will be shown does not depend on the initial type of field. By default, all these fields are shown in the filter using checkboxes, meaning a user can find threads having any of values they will select:



However, each of these fields could be configured to use another control type in filter forms:



I have now configured the "Single Selection" field to allow multiple values when filtering (joined with logic OR), and the Multiple Selection field to allow only one value in the filter (using selection list). You can see an active filter at https://xf2.addonslab.com/index.php..._2&thread_fields[multiple_selection]=option_1



Just let us know if you have any other questions regarding how this works.

No, the idea was basically if you can do an "AND" search between the same field. So this:
(color=yellow AND color=blue) AND name=ferrari".
So basically I would be looking for a Ferrari which is blue and yellow at the same time, and not for ferraris which are blue OR yellow.

I see now. Sure, that could be implemented. Is it okay to implement the difference between AND/OR search mode as a configuration value for each field when you create/edit it in Admin Panel? So, when you decide the field to be a checkbox/option/selection list, you will also have an option to decide, how multiple values selected would behave - find all threads matching ANY selected option or ALL of selected options. We could also show this to the user as a small notification under field name, so they know how multiple values selected will behave.

Another option could be giving the users the control to decide, if they want to use AND or OR logic for multiple fields. Selecting more than one of options they would immediately see another field to choose, if they want to see threads matching all criteria selected or any of criteria.

Both solutions described are comparable in amount of time we need to spend to implement them (one requires more admin side enhancement, another more front-end related changes). Please let us know what is your opinion, which solution would be the best for your use case, and we will go with that option. We should be able to implement the feature in a week or so from now.

Thank you for the details you have provided regarding your decision on a funded project. You can definitely be sure, that this product, just like other our products are at high priority for us and will keep being developed and features added unless they are stable and fully useful in most of the use-cases our customers have.

Thank you!

 

[nocte]

@AddonsLab , I read your last post, and being also interested in this product and this option, I'd say the admin-option would be better, because the user interface should be kept simple: Many users won't understand the difference between an OR and an AND search.

 

[AddonsLab]

@AddonsLab , I read your last post, and being also interested in this product and this option, I'd say the admin-option would be better, because the user interface should be kept simple: Many users won't understand the difference between an OR and an AND search.

I see. We would consider phrasing like "Show threads matching: (selection list showing "All selected" and "Any selected"). What do you think, would it be understandable for users?

 

[nocte]

I see. We would consider phrasing like "Show threads matching: (selection list showing "All selected" and "Any selected"). What do you think, would it be understandable for users?

Well, I think especially for new and/or not too experienced users too many selections / options can feel overwhelming. Of course, power users have time and will to learn how the search form works, but the new ones want an easy to fill out form.

 

[sbj]

@AddonsLab
First of all thank you for your responses, they are very kind and you explain very well. Now I see that it works as I would want it.

Btw. I went back and studied all updates and I must say the new AJAX update is definitely awesome and the idea of showing the fields in thread_list under thread titles and/or as prefixes is an underrated idea. Thank you for that.

About the "AND" search suggestion.
Your suggested 2nd way of doing, letting the users choose, is theoretically better as it would mean you can choose between both (AND and OR).
But on the other hand it would be a bit confusing for users.
The first way of doing it would limit it more, as you would have to choose as admin prior creation what would be the best case and would exclude the other option. But on the other hand the users wouldn't be bothered about it

For me both ways are ok.


I have couple of more suggestions, if it is ok.

When showing the fields in thread_list under the titles, it would be better not to show the field names, only the field values would be better.
Or at least for lower resolution (like smartphones), it would better if the field names could disappear, and only the values are shown.
For me this suggestion is very low priority, but it came to my mind seeing that feature.

2nd suggestion is about ordering the custom field choices.
Can we have automatical alphabetical ordering of the choices in the filters section, when we activate it in Admin Panel for that x field?

For example let's say I created a custom field about cities. And then gave choices in random order with hundreds of city names.
Now of course when people see the filter, I want them to view that field in alphabetical order.
This would be high priority for me personally, specially I have a custom request, the Turkish alphabet is slightly different than the common English one, so I would need that in that alphabetical order.


Another suggestion about ordering is, that if we could prioritize some choices over the alphabetical order.
Like this:

USA
Angola
Argentina
Brazil
Chile
...

So the "USA" choice would be displayed before the automatical alphabetical ordering.
For example when someone has an American forum, and somewhere he has custom fields and a filter about countries (like its a classifieds section). Obviously most of his users would be from the US and would want to choose quickly USA, rather than scrolling 100 country names every time they want to find sth.
This would be for me medium important.

I could live without the first and third suggestion, but the alphabetical ordering is a must. As XF allows us no way of alphabetical ordering of the custom field choices in Admin Panel. So the only solution would be to at least have an ordering in the view section where the filters are.
Also you can see a suggestion made here about that:
https://xenforo.com/community/threads/custom-field-sorting-drag-n-drop-alphabetical.134607/

 

[AddonsLab]

. @sbj , thank you for the kind words.

Thank you for the suggestions.

We had to make the decision of showing/not showing field titles for each of locations - as a prefix, under the title, as a column, as practically in each location it is possible to imagine both use cases. It is even possible, that one field should have a title shown (e.g. a numberic field, value of which alone would say nothing about it), and some other would not need the title (e.g. date field, rating, color). So, what we will ensure is that the title is available in each of locations, but it will be hidden using CSS by some default rules we will provide. The elements, however, will have CSS classes matching their location and field ID, so that admins would be able to write simple CSS rules to hide/show any of titles, and control the behavior of the fields on different screen sizes. This is basically implemented like that now, but will require some testing and fine-tuning.

Regarding ordering, I think the main problem here is the ordering in back-end, that would apply edit/add thread forms as well as the filters. I don't see any reason to have different ordering during adding the information and in the filter. So I think the issue should be solves as suggested at https://xenforo.com/community/threads/custom-field-sorting-drag-n-drop-alphabetical.134607/ by @Alfa1 by allowing admins to order the custom fields. I totally understand the need for such feature, and I see there is no activity in that thread and no confirmation from XenForo developers that the feature will be implemented. I think we will consider developing an add-on that will support ordering of all options in all custom fields, not only for threads but also in all add-ons using the same framework. We will assign this task higher priority and should be able to release that add-on in several days. Estimated price for the add-on will be 15-20 USD, depending on the time we will spend developing it.

As I understand, this will also solve the problem you have mentioned in your third point, as you could simply order the options in a way to provide the most useful options on top of the list, and users would see them in the same order when creating a thread and filtering the threads.

Please let us know your thoughts and if you have any other suggestions.

Thank you!

 

[sbj]

o that admins would be able to write simple CSS rules to hide/show any of titles

I haven't thought about that actually, good idea. Then there would be no need of an extra development, just let everyone use his/her css rules and done.

I don't see any reason to have different ordering during adding the information and in the filter.

Me, neither. Actually it would be more useful to have both in the same order, so we would kind of have a "What you see is what you get" method. Just, I thought asking you to enhance the custom fields would be out of scope of this addon. From my suggestion about the "dependable" solution, I kind of understood that direct changes to the custom fields is not the priority of this addon, as this addon deals with the displaying of those fields, not with those fields themselves. And because of that I thought you could make the displaying alphabetical, so without touching the original fields, as this would mean less work for you and probably suited for this addon.

But from what I see you would consider making another addon to solve this problem in general, which is actually nice. Thank you!

 

[AddonsLab]

Hello everyone,

Just to inform, that we have released an add-on that allows sorting of custom field options (not only for threads, but also for user fields, resource fields and other add-ons that extend the same framework) - https://xenforo.com/community/resources/sort-field-options-for-xenforo-2-x.6257/ The addon is a free addition for all our customers owning an active license of Thread Filter addon. Please open a ticket at https://customers.addonslab.com/submitticket.php and we will assign a license for you.

Thank you!

 

[sbj]

Future requests:

- In "Options for choice fields"

Move these options above all the choices, otherwise we have to scroll always down all the choices. It makes a lot of difference if you do have a lot of options.

-I can check if I want that xyz custom field appear in the thread list, so we can filter it (like in sidebar or above threads).
Can we have also an option if we also want the default XF filter options appear? Currently they are by default added always and also we can't arrange them (if I am not mistaken). Also having the default xf filter options in popup (like it is by default) AND the custom field filter wherever we want would be nice. Or maybe hiding with css possible? Hmm.

 

[AddonsLab]

Hello, @sbj !

Move these options above all the choices, otherwise we have to scroll always down all the choices. It makes a lot of difference if you do have a lot of options.

I see what you mean. However, I believe in almost all cases (except some boards with very specific custom fields that can reach tens or hundreds), the main reason admin comes to that sector is actually to customize the options, and it is very very rare to come there especially to change the type of input (which is just one-time decision). So, we would consider leaving the options on top.

-I can check if I want that xyz custom field appear in the thread list, so we can filter it (like in sidebar or above threads).

This is already implemented on a per-forum basis. Filtering is not done directly from thread list but from filter form, but the values can be shown in the list (as a prefix, as a column, under the title).

Can we have also an option if we also want the default XF filter options appear? Currently they are by default added always and also we can't arrange them (if I am not mistaken). Also having the default xf filter options in popup (like it is by default) AND the custom field filter wherever we want would be nice. Or maybe hiding with css possible? Hmm.

I see the use case, but this would require quite a lot of changes, as we have implemented several locations for the form and they all depend on the fact, that the filter form is moved with it. Anyway, if several our customers will request the feature we will invest some time in implementing it.

Thank you!

 

[sbj]

So, we would consider leaving the options on top.

I understand, not a big deal. I just thought you have to move that options in the templates section just to the top, like copy/paste style. But no problem.

I see the use case, but this would require quite a lot of changes, as we have implemented several locations for the form and they all depend on the fact, that the filter form is moved with it. Anyway, if several our customers will request the feature we will invest some time in implementing it.

I understand that moving the form out of the filter form would take a lot of changes. (maybe for the wishlist a good thing).

But at least, can we have an option to define the ordering in the filter form itself?
Right now the display order of the custom fields define the order of in which order the filter is shown in the filter form.
So we can already order the custom fields in the filter form.

What missing is that those default filter options like "Started by" "Last updated" "Prefix" "Sort by" have no display order. Those first 3 are somehow shown first, then the custom fields, then the "Sort by" option. Not sure why you have chosen this order, but it is kind of strange.
So what is left to do would be to give those default options a display order which hooks to the custom fields display order, then we would be able to define by ourselves how it is shown in the filters without you needing to move out the filters from the filter form.

I hope I could explain the situation.

Thank you again.

 

[AddonsLab]

AddonsLab updated Thread Filter by AddonsLab with a new update entry:

Bug-fix: PHP error on forum RSS pages

This is a bug-fix version solving the PHP error shown on RSS pages.

The new version is available for all licensed customers at
https://customers.addonslab.com/marketplace.php/my-services/

Feel free to suggest further enhancements for the add-on or report any issues you have and they will be addressed asap.

Please consider posting a review if you are using the add-on and let us and other users know how it works for you.

Thank you!

Read the rest of this update entry...

 

[imno007]

I see. We would consider phrasing like "Show threads matching: (selection list showing "All selected" and "Any selected"). What do you think, would it be understandable for users?

That's probably the way to go. Don't dumb it down too much. People can learn.

 

[imno007]

@AddonsLab
Just so you know, your admin demo says there are currently 132 missing files...

 

[AddonsLab]

@AddonsLab
Just so you know, your admin demo says there are currently 132 missing files...

Thank you, the reason is that the demo as some our add-ons applied which using their development version, which are slightly different from published versions and cause "unexpected content" error.