4 ms·

> searches contain mispelled words, and users will expect these searches to magically work HELL NO, I expect searches to return "result not found". This is imp

by rasz_pl 12y ago

> searches contain mispelled words, and users will expect these searches to magically work HELL NO, I expect searches to return "result not found". This is important information, as important as actual found results. I dont mind clearly labelled suggestions, but NEVER EVER give me what you think I want, instead of what I actually ask for.

Gigablah 12y ago
You're not the typical user then.
- twic 12y ago
  I don't think we actually know what the typical user wants. Or is one of us aware of some really good user research on this subject? One of our common failings as programmers is making incorrect assumptions about what the user wants. rasz_pl is assuming that the user is like him, and values precision. Gigablah is assuming that the user is not like rasz_pl, and does not value precision. Both of those are simply assumptions. I hear this all the time. "But of course the user will want to be able to choose exactly which columns of data are in the table!". "But of course the user would rather see one nice simple summary number than the actual details!". Both of those are scary.
kleiba 12y ago
Couldn't you do both? As in, "no results found, did you mean <alternative>?"
- TheLoneWolfling 12y ago
  This I don't mind. What frustrates me is when searches "correct" things for you, and especially when there is no way to prevent the "correction". Case in point: Google. As far as I can tell there is no way to search for something on Google without it "correcting" it for you. + used to work, but it no longer does. Quotations used to work, but that no longer does either. Sometimes it pops up "Search instead for <search term you actually entered>", but not always.
  - lbarrett 12y ago
    Realy? [1] [1] https://www.google.com/search?q="realy" https://www.google.com/search?q="realy"
    - TheLoneWolfling 12y ago
      Counterexample: https://www.google.com/search?q="becausw" https://www.google.com/search?q="becausw"
      - lbarrett 12y ago
        Works for me, including in a private session (i.e. no cookies). I'm not sure what would be different between us. http://leon.barrettnexus.com/share/becausw.png http://leon.barrettnexus.com/share/becausw.png
        TheLoneWolfling 12y ago
        Wrong definition of work there, sorry. There's really two issues. That one displays the latter but not the former - it autocorrects and there is no way to turn off the autocorrection, but yes, that one does display the "search instead for" part. I'll give you a ring next time I run across something that doesn't have the "search instead for" part.
        lbarrett 12y ago
        Google is probably never going to add the configuration option you want, since for 99.5% of users, the current behavior is what they want. You, as an advanced user, might be best served by something like this: https://userstyles.org/styles/48493/google-hide-the-did-you-mean-suggestion https://userstyles.org/styles/48493/google-hide-the-did-you-...
Pxtl 12y ago
Google does it the right way - they tell you "we think you mean x, not y, if you really mean y click here."

by rasz_pl 12y ago

Gigablah 12y ago

You're not the typical user then.

twic 12y ago
I don't think we actually know what the typical user wants. Or is one of us aware of some really good user research on this subject? One of our common failings as programmers is making incorrect assumptions about what the user wants. rasz_pl is assuming that the user is like him, and values precision. Gigablah is assuming that the user is not like rasz_pl, and does not value precision. Both of those are simply assumptions. I hear this all the time. "But of course the user will want to be able to choose exactly which columns of data are in the table!". "But of course the user would rather see one nice simple summary number than the actual details!". Both of those are scary.

kleiba 12y ago

Couldn't you do both? As in, "no results found, did you mean <alternative>?"

TheLoneWolfling 12y ago
This I don't mind. What frustrates me is when searches "correct" things for you, and especially when there is no way to prevent the "correction". Case in point: Google. As far as I can tell there is no way to search for something on Google without it "correcting" it for you. + used to work, but it no longer does. Quotations used to work, but that no longer does either. Sometimes it pops up "Search instead for <search term you actually entered>", but not always.
- lbarrett 12y ago
  Realy? [1] [1] https://www.google.com/search?q="realy" https://www.google.com/search?q="realy"
  - TheLoneWolfling 12y ago
    Counterexample: https://www.google.com/search?q="becausw" https://www.google.com/search?q="becausw"
    - lbarrett 12y ago
      Works for me, including in a private session (i.e. no cookies). I'm not sure what would be different between us. http://leon.barrettnexus.com/share/becausw.png http://leon.barrettnexus.com/share/becausw.png
      - TheLoneWolfling 12y ago
        Wrong definition of work there, sorry. There's really two issues. That one displays the latter but not the former - it autocorrects and there is no way to turn off the autocorrection, but yes, that one does display the "search instead for" part. I'll give you a ring next time I run across something that doesn't have the "search instead for" part.
        lbarrett 12y ago
        Google is probably never going to add the configuration option you want, since for 99.5% of users, the current behavior is what they want. You, as an advanced user, might be best served by something like this: https://userstyles.org/styles/48493/google-hide-the-did-you-mean-suggestion https://userstyles.org/styles/48493/google-hide-the-did-you-...

Pxtl 12y ago

Google does it the right way - they tell you "we think you mean x, not y, if you really mean y click here."