Difference Between Tag Scope and Search Filter

[MaxSupernova]

Hi Rob.

I'm sorry you are feeling frustrated. I'm sorry that you are feeling pecked to death by ducks over this.

But, and I'm going to be blunt here:

I'm not the one who released this product in this state.

I'm not the one who apparently understaffed for the release and development before go-live.

I'm not a kickstarter backer who has been at this for a year and agreed to help in the development of the program.

What I am is someone who paid fifty bucks for a program three weeks ago and is rather surprised at the state of a released-to-the-wild program.

Now, I'm as patient and understanding as the next guy, and I've been trying to be helpful by placing bug reports and writing up forum posts that fill in documentation holes and everything, but I think I also deserve to be kept up to date on what the heck is going on with the program, whether my fifty bucks is going to be wasted because development is going to take too long to be worth waiting for, whether there is any sort of plan for development (which I have not seen any evidence of yet, despite your frustration that we all don't just assume there is one).

I get that you are all really busy and working your butts off right now. I appreciate that, and I understand that you are feeling overworked. However, that's a company management problem, it's not a customer facing problem.

There needs to be a bit more of a shift from "We're all just working on a kickstarter beta program together" towards "We are advertising and selling this program to real-world people right now."

So I am sorry if you're feeling put-upon, but you folks made promises, and you decided to release this program for sale. Maybe it's time to put on the big-boy pants and either deliver or be ready to deal with questions and frustration that stuff doesn't work like a real company instead of a group of open-source hackers working on a project in Google Groups who have the luxury of claiming "I'm too busy" in the forums. Tired of hearing that it doesn't sound like you have a plan? The solution is to publish your plan, not tell us to stop complaining that it doesn't sound like you have a plan.

I don't want my money back. I want this program to work. I really want to get behind this program. I need this program. I like the little community here. But I also want to feel like I'm not just wasting my time here.

You really need to know that "But we don't have enough people to do what needs to be done! I'm so overworked! Stop nagging!" is a very poor excuse to be putting out there to a frustrated customer who just paid full price for your software and is asking about features that aren't documented well or functioning properly.

Like, seriously? "Here's finally a reasonable description of a major feature that isn't documented at all well and has an inconsistent confusing interface, now stop complaining so I can get back to working on the program" is just... wow.



There. Now we both had our little rants. Back to working with the program.

[EightBitz]

I feel obligated to defend Rob here, because I was so hard on him about holding off on release. I and others were pressuring him to let the product loose into the wild saying that we were willing to deal with whatever bugs/shortcomings it has with the understanding that work will continue to iron those out. Even with that, he still held off until he thought the product was stable, even if it wasn't finished.

So, that's what we have. An unfinished, but stable product. As far as future plans for the product, you can look here:

http://www.wolflair.com/realmworks/f...f-realm-works/

As far as undocumented features, maybe every detail isn't documented, but it has more documentation than, say, Microsoft Word or Excel.

For things that aren't documented, there's an active support community here. That active support community includes the developers. How many other companies do that? Have you ever tried to deal with Google or Microsoft on this level?

Rob and the other developers know the product is unfinished. They know its underdocumented. They are working on both of these issues. They've provided a forum for input, discussion and questions.

The point of Rob's post was simply to ask us to ask our questions without making the worst assumptions.

[mirtos]

I for one see both points. If Rob hadn't released, people would have been upset (as they were) about the delays. If Rob did release, then he has to deal with people feeling the product isnt complete.

Personally, I feel he chose the right balance. Also its important to remember this IS a 1.0 product. Keep that in mind. You might not be a kickstarter, but you ARE an early adopter.

[MaxSupernova]

Thanks Eightbitz.

I think Rob and the others need to know that I'm simply frustrated when I see things in this great program that don't seem to measure up to the rest of what's there so far. I'm pulling for this program so hard. I checked the front page literally every day from September until release day. No kidding. I'm ripped that I wasn't on on the kickstarter and early release.

They have been quite open about the fact that the program is currently developing, and it is stable enough.

The customer interaction has been fun and mostly informative. There are some information strategy issues I'd have done differently, but I'm not running the company and any two people would do it differently anyway. I need to keep reminding myself in life that "Not my way" isn't wrong.

Rob, I will try to be more politic with my comments. I really, honestly, not backhandedly do apologize if I got you upset. My wife always gets on me for being too blunt. I know you're working hard. I see the results of your work every day. I appreciate your efforts to try to do all that you do. I get overzealous in trying to help and end up trying to lead when it's not my place.

I do not expect complete documentation on this product, at all. It's changing far too fast for that. However, I have a special interest in UI, and I do expect consistency and standards, which I have pointed out when I don't see it. UI issues will make the lack of documentation a problem. Good UI will make your documentation either unnecessary or much simpler.

----------
BTW Eightbitz, apropos of nothing - are you serious about there being no documentation for Word or Excel?!?! Have you ever pressed F1 in either of those? You get complete, cross-referenced documentation that's online so it's always up to date. Their interfaces are also consistent and follow Windows norms so things are usually easy to figure out. Bad example to use.

[Okay, once the stupid ribbon came in, all bets were off, but at least you could ask help where stuff was...]

[mirtos]

Keep in mind, Microsoft bought both Word and Excel.

[MaxSupernova]

Originally Posted by rob

Scoping and basic filters are CRITICALLY DIFFERENT.

Hi Rob,

Back to the topic at hand rather than all that "soft skills" stuff... :-D

=====
DON'T READ IF YOU DON'T WANT CRITIQUE OF THE CURRENT IMPLEMENTATION
If you are changing this, or have a plan for it, then ignore my post. Go look at this awesome puppy video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNHVXSPEIpY
To get a current user perspective, read on.
=====

I do see the difference between the purpose of the two features. I understand that they will be incredibly useful. I see the purpose of each. But the issue I was raising is that the UI that is implemented doesn't support that vision or make it apparent. I had doubts about whether I understood the concepts because as I see it the UI doesn't point to that at all.

Scoping would be great if you set one scope that was in place for the rest of the session. But it's not. New tabs don't get affected by the scope, and the "apply to all" is bugged in its behaviour (logged). If the logic of scoping is as you explained it then "apply to all" should be assumed, including for new tabs. The only functional difference betwen scoping and search as it stands now is that search allows keywords and tags vs. scoping only allows tags, and you have to retype the search for each new tab rather than having to just enable the scope for each new tab. That's it.

If we truly want to set a scope as you mention it, then it needs to apply to all tabs (possibly with an option to turn of the scope for a tab rather than making the user manually apply it to each new tab). It needs to be an overarching set-and-forget feature, which it currently isn't.

I also understand the attempt at using the icon overlays, but using the green checkmark to mean that a filter is active (with nothing to indicate that a filter is defined but inactive), and at the same time using the green checkmark to mean that a scope is defined but not necessarily active, and using the tag overlay on the search icon to indicate that a scope is active (with nothing on the scope icon to indicate such) is just plain confusing.

To summarize, as it stands there are two features that are functionally identical with a few tweaks. It's all well and good to say that one is supposed to be used for X and one is supposed to be used for Y, but they are essentially the same right now. A few tweaks could make them much more obviously to be used how you intend.

To make the features act as you laid out above, I'd suggest the following changes:

- make scoping automatically apply to new tabs (perhaps adding a "remove scope from this tab" rather than "add scope to all tabs" button).

- make it more clear when a filter and a scope are applied, in a consistent manner for both. Make the green checkmark indicate that one is enabled. Perhaps the pencil or a red check to indicate
that one is defined but not active. Personally I'd add a "reminder" that scoping is active in the search dialog, not on the search icon itself.

- Don't grey out menu items when they are active. A search box with nothing in it, but that is waiting for input, is active and shouldn't be greyed out. A tag selection box with nothing in it is still active if you can click it. Greyed out things aren't supposed to do anything when you click on them, these do.

- remove the duplicate and functionally-incomplete scope dialog from the filter dialog. Completely separate the two functionally. Again, I see why it might have been thought a good idea to put it there, but it's just confusing, especially when it looks almost the same as the scope dialog but functions differently (which is a bit weird in itself).

- some indicator on the tab header that a search is in place might be nice, but it also might be cluttered. Not sure on that one yet.

There. That's my thoughts on making the features both independent and more obviously useful for what they were intended. A few minor tweaks (especially the apply to all tabs bit) wold make these much more useful, and much more obvious about their intent.

I understand that you read this. There is no need to respond or correct or anything. If you find it useful, use it. If you don't, just smile and nod at the annoying user and file it in the circular file. At least I got it off my chest.

And I look forward to using auto-assigning tags when it doesn't crash my realm (logged). :-D

[EightBitz]

Originally Posted by MaxSupernova

(snip)

----------
BTW Eightbitz, apropos of nothing - are you serious about there being no documentation for Word or Excel?!?! Have you ever pressed F1 in either of those? You get complete, cross-referenced documentation that's online so it's always up to date. Their interfaces are also consistent and follow Windows norms so things are usually easy to figure out. Bad example to use.

[Okay, once the stupid ribbon came in, all bets were off, but at least you could ask help where stuff was...]

No, that's not what I said. I said that there was more documentation for RW than for word. This product has documentation that you can print out and bind (which I've done) and read at your leisure. Word has a help system. Even with that help, system, though, it covers technical points, not conceptual points. The question you asked about when to use scope filters vs. searches is a conceptual one. I found Rob's answer about the distinction to be informative and useful. It gives me ideas for how I can organize things.

Now, with Word, there have been things I've wanted to do for which:
a) I could find no help.
b) I could find no online answers.
c) I could find no documentation of any sort.
d) There was no forum where the development team would interact with me.
e) OpenOffice was able to do perfectly and with no more investigation required on my part than looking through the menu options.

This has happened to me on multiple occasions. And in some cases, when I subsequently open the file in Word, my desired formatting is still there. So Word recognizes what I've done, which potentially implies that Word does have the feature I used. It's just not documented anywhere.

My point is, if you're going to hold that standard for documentation, and put it in the context of a small company being understaffed, I think you're missing the mark big time.

I've said some things in this forum that I've ultimately regretted. Having learned that lesson first-hand, I offer that this team is doing a commendable job.

Again, that doesn't mean you shouldn't offer feedback you think is important, even if it is criticism. By all means, do so. Just make it constructive.

[Gallinaar]

Here are a few 'snippets' I have drawn up while browsing these forums at a reasonable distance for many months. If these were being entered into RealmWorks, I wonder which would be classified as either True, Partially True, or False.

• Very amusing that when someone purchases the software, they believe it somehow gives them the right to say how the company should develop, produce and market it.
  
• The belief that the customer has the right to say whatever he likes in any manner and attitude he fancies. That somehow the 'tough and rude approach' will get him the attention and software modifications he seeks.
  
• The vain belief that the user has the gift of total perception when it comes to what the company is planning, working on, intending for its customers, has planned for the future, it's pricing strategies and corporate goals.
  
• The claims of patience and understanding when there are none evident.
  
• Comments made by the loud and vociferous may sometimes be valid, though are not necessarily representative. There are apparently thousands of users out there. Many who do not utilise or comment on the forums.
  
• The childish expectation that demands and demands, "I want, I want" with its gob open for the next worm. Not a hint of a thank you or a smidgen of gratitude anywhere.
  
• The lack of appreciation for the serious effort, time, contribution, willingness to incorporate ideas and requests, frequency of response to queries and problems, dedication to a huge goal with many targets to achieve along the way.
  
• The complete inability to notice when people are working under great pressure and time constraints, while trying to deliver a complex, 'dream' of a project that has not failed to live up to its marketing claims.
  
• The mistaken belief that software should be somehow totally complete when first issued to the public. That bugs, or features not yet introduced, are somehow evidence of this incompleteness.
  
• The huge level of negative criticisms, assumptions, suppositions, inappropriate comments, and thoughtless verbal diatribes about unreleased software. Then on release, a sudden 'praise' with a phrase less than a line long.
  
• It is wonderful, and rare these days, that there are developers who are willing to discuss, share and acknowledge users suggestions and criticisms, even when they're delivered in anything but a polite manner.
  
• Defending one's position, or pleading for fair and rational treatment, is often completely unnecessary and is also likely to fall on some deaf ears. There is also a likelihood of being prodded, poked and tormented even more as a result.

To me, RealmWorks is a very smooth, tidy and highly organized piece of software. As I enter my data I am gradually becoming aware of its possibilities, its various functions, the carefully thought out and balanced structure. I am in no doubt that the additions and features planned for this year will only enhance its already unique status.

[MaxSupernova]

I'm sorry, Gallinaar, but that was a complete misrepresentation of what anyone has said about the company or the product, and it was quite frankly an offensive thing to hear from someone with no comments and no relationship with anyone here. You amazingly managed to misrepresent the customers, the forums, the company and the product in one single post.

[MaxSupernova]

Eightbitz - points taken. All of them, I hope. You said some good things.