but we are not alone in this world: all and every search that i know, going thru emails, even those on webmails, uses partial searches as a default
I just tested Thunderbird, it
does not use partial searches (in case I need to refer to what I had searched for, I searched for "mortal" vs "mort" where the former found results and the latter did not). Using my email provider's web-based mail, it
does use partial searches. Gmail
does not use partial searches (test case: receipt vs ceipt).
In the cases of TB and Gmail that do not appear to use partial searching, there's probably (and "certainly" in the case of gmail for obvious reasons) fancier searching going on, so that I would presume searching for "horse" will find "horses". But I'd be very surprised if the examples of partial words you provided worked in TB or Gmail like they did in PPv5b21.
So, right now, I'm still inclined to stick with whole word, but I'm very open to changing that. After all, it's just a flip of a switch to change the default, no skin off my back; I just want to go with what I think the majority of people would expect (*because* I don't expect people to know about the wildcard usage).
it would only be fair to introduce this properly and rather loudly to your beta-user - rather than confusing them.
It's in the change notes. And it includes a very detailed explanation of the changes to the search engine that took place in b22. And the first change I mention regarding the search engine is this very topic. Further, I've stated that the primary method of information will be via the MOTD, and the current MOTD is "This update has made changes to the search engine. Please report any issues." The button on the bottom of the MOTD is (and always has been, for the beta) a link to the change notes.
That being said, I actually had an ulterior motive for being so brief on the MOTD. b22 brought a *major* change to the search engine and I originally had planned on going into great detail; but -- I wanted to see if anyone would bring it up. So, thank you, you started the conversation that I wanted but sometimes talking to oneself isn't very constructive
And hopefully anyone else that has an opinion also joins this conversation.
yes, i did check for that ''medim and dimops'' - but no, they were not there as fragments. so on this point, still no idea.
Would you be willing to send the email source so that I can test it? Save the source (view message in PP: File / Save message as) and then attach it via PM or email (do not attach in the public forum). If it really doesn't exist, then I do have a theory.
many people will copy / paste words or fragments into the search box, and then adding * in front and behind is a pain, often forgotten, and leading to wrong or no results
I would disagree with that generalization. If you copy/paste, then you're probably going to copy the entire phrase and not stop the selection in half a word. e.g. the thing that I most often copy/paste to search is an email address; and I make sure I copy the entire email address, even before the change to whole word.
Why would you copy half a word....?
and please, this was not really only critical - more like suggestions.
Criticism is fine as long as it's constructive