[Phpmyadmin-devel] New feature: Load/save Query-By-Example

[Hugues Peccatte]

Hi,

2014-03-05 16:54 GMT+01:00 Isaac Bennetch <bennetch at gmail.com>:

>
>
> On 3/4/14 6:38 PM, Isaac Bennetch wrote:
> > Hi Hugues, very nice work on this. I have a few comments below:
> >
> > On 3/3/14 3:14 PM, Hugues Peccatte wrote:
> >> 2014-03-03 18:47 GMT+01:00 Hugues Peccatte <hugues.peccatte at gmail.com
> >> <mailto:hugues.peccatte at gmail.com>>:
> >>
> >>     Hi,
> >>
> >>     2014-03-03 14:43 GMT+01:00 Isaac Bennetch <bennetch at gmail.com
> >>     <mailto:bennetch at gmail.com>>:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>         On 2/28/14 7:52 AM, Marc Delisle wrote:
> >>         > Hugues Peccatte a écrit :
> >>         >> Hi everyone,
> >>         >>
> >>         >> I just implemented the new feature "Load/save
> >>         Query-By-Example" (see ticket
> >>         >> https://sourceforge.net/p/phpmyadmin/feature-requests/569/
> >>         and pull request
> >>         >> https://github.com/phpmyadmin/phpmyadmin/pull/958).
> >>         >>
> >>         >> In the UI interface, I used the terms "New search" and "Saved
> >>         searches".
> >>         >> Marc proposed to use the terms "New search definition" and
> >>         "Saved search
> >>         >> definitions".
> >>         >>
> >>         >> Which one do you prefer? Which one is the more understandable
> >>         for an
> >>         >> english people? Do you have another interesting proposal?
> >>         >>
> >>         >> Thanks for your feedback.
> >>         >>
> >>         >> Hugues.
> >>         >
> >>         > Hi,
> >>         > it could also be "New search bookmark", "Saved search
> >>         bookmarks", ...
> >>
> >>         Of the three choices proposed, I most prefer "New search
> >>         bookmark" and
> >>         "Saved search bookmarks". Using the word "query" instead of
> "search"
> >>         also fits nicely.
> >>
> >>
> >>     In SQL tab, there is a text "Bookmark this SQL query". Couldn't it
> >>     lead to confusion?
> >>     I agree with "search bookmark". So I'll change this.
> >>
> >>
> >> I changed it, locally. I used "bookmarked search". Is it ok ?
> >>
> >
> > Yes, this seems good to me now.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>         A few things I noticed while testing this feature:
> >>
> >>         1) When attempting to save a bookmark without providing a name,
> >>         instead
> >>         of "Missing information to save the search." we should be more
> >>         specific
> >>         and instead say "Please provide a name for this bookmarked
> query."
> >>
> >>
> >>     I agree. I'll try to implement this.
> >>
> >>
> >> Done.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > I think you may be using the wrong dialog here; it is saying "MySQL
> > said" and has a link to the MySQL documentation. Otherwise I like this.
>

I replaced it by the good popup (I hope...).


>  >>
> >>
> >>
> >>         In an ideal world, IMO, the proper field should then get focus
> >>         and have
> >>         a light red background until the user starts to type. I don't
> >>         believe we
> >>         do that anywhere, but it is a good way to draw the user's
> >>         attention to
> >>         the blank and required field.
> >>
> >>
> >>     I agree also. I'll try to see if I can do something about this.
> >>
> >>
> >> I did it, but there is a "problem"... The field is focused, but behind the
> >> "PMA_ajaxShowMessage". So I click on the popin to close it... and lose the
> >> focus...
> >> The only thing that I can do is to add a red border to the field. As the
> >> content of the page is reloaded when submitting the form, the field
> >> won't stay red too long.
> >>
> >> I'm working at the same time and I did something:
> >> - when having an error, I receive the id of a field (already done to
> >> focus the element)
> >> - I remove the class "error" of all inputs in the page
> >> - I had the class "error" to the field
> >>
> >> So even if there are many errors on different fields without reload,
> >> only one field will stay with the "error" class.
> >>
> >> What do you think about this please?
> >>
> >
> > It's an interesting problem and I'm not thrilled with the results
> > (because of the limitations you mention above). Perhaps it's something
> > we should leave alone for now and I'll open a feature request with a
> > list of everywhere that could benefit from this.
>
> Take a look at the "Create database" form by clicking the Databases tab
> of the main page. Attempting to create a database with no name gives a
> nice red highlight and "Please fill out this field" popup. Hopefully
> that clears up what I meant; but we can simply add this form to the list
> at https://sourceforge.net/p/phpmyadmin/feature-requests/1513/ if you'd
> like.
>

I think this is a browser design. On Chrome, the field only has a tip.
This is displayed by the attribute "required". I don't think that I can use
it because there are some cases where we don't need to set a name.


>
> >>
> >>         2) I think we should we prompt the user before saving over an
> >>         existing
> >>         bookmark.
> >>
> >>
> >>     Currently, you can't use a bookmark name already used by this user
> >>     on this DB. Do you mean that we should authorize to overwrite a name
> >>     if the user agree?
> >
> > I can only speak about how I expect it to work, and I now understand how
> > it is meant to work, but it seems a bit confusing. You're allowing the
> > user to rename their search by typing in a new name to "searchName", but
> > to create a modified copy of an existing query a user would have to
> > select "New bookmark" from the "searchId" dropdown. As a user, I
> > expected it to create a new bookmark with the new name, leaving the old
> > one intact. Yes, I realize the submit button says "Save bookmark" which
> > is a clue, but I ignored the label and pressed on, convinced I knew
> > better :-D
> >
> > I believe people are more likely to want to create a copy of a bookmark
> > than rename one (renaming can essentially be done by creating a copy and
> > removing the old one, which isn't ideal but I think is pretty well
> > understood).
> >
> > I'd appreciate some other thoughts about this, especially if I'm wrong
> > here :)
>

I believe that I don't understand one part...
[...]
Oh... I read it again. Maybe I understood this time...
After loading a search and setting a new name, you expect to have the first
one and the new one with the new name. I think that I got it !

I wait for other feedbacks before changing the behavior, but it could be
interesting too. :)

Hugues.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.phpmyadmin.net/pipermail/developers/attachments/20140307/672d5840/attachment.html>