[zargron]

Giday janrif,

The main intention behind my facetious comments was to illicit a response rather than quash the filtered tree idea. And yes, such a detailed & long enhancement proposal can easily confuse, but more likely, in this fast paced age in which we live, result in people not even bothering to read it. I considered this before preparing & posting, wanting to find out for future reference the impact / worth of a post of that style. It surprised me however that there were zero replies after about 10 days. Did people look at it and think "oh good, it's in the pipeline now so I won't even bother to post"? Did they think "what a load of crap, I'm not going to bother to post"? Were they fully confused? Unfortunately I'll never know...

I can tell you that I would be interested but not if it slows URp. I think I mentioned that.

I've proposed it being a search facility since that gives Kinook an opportunity to contain it's impact. The user creates the query and executes it when they want. I suggest that refresh of query results be left for the user to initiate rather than being triggered automatically.

For example, I understand hoisting & the concept of filtering the tree but I'm not sure how that is beneficial over just getting search results. OTOH, I think I meekly suggested a grep-type search just for the tree that might provide some simple tree filtering...

A couple of things.

Filtering the existing data explorer pane (if that is what you are suggesting) is in IMHO out of the question. It is a cornerstone interface component that all existing users have to be familiar with. Being fundamental to UR and very stable I suggest it should be left alone.

Regards whether being "beneficial over search results", try creating an item in the search results pane. In my post under Requirements Overview I subtly mention "...manipulating data items in an outline format". Having established and run a search (filter), I suggest that the user should be free to add, edit and delete items. This is a key issue with all outlining software - messing around getting to the right place in the tree before you can create a new item. UR already handles this problem quite well. For example:
--- search for an item nearby where you want to put your new item
--- double-click that item in the search results pane to highlight it in the data explorer
--- perform a short distance navigation in data explorer before creating your new item in the correct location

I had no response either. So what? Did that make it a stupid, useless ignorant suggestion? Maybe.

More significantly, it gives Kinook full right to decide that filtered tree view gets put at the back of the Roadmap.