| boolean search foxtrot pro bug. 5.0 build 1267 [message #221] |
Fri, 22 August 2014 15:06  |
rwstahlhut
Messages: 3
Registered: August 2014
|
Junior Member |
|
|
Hello FT team.
I was searching for a group of papers by several authors. Below are the
searches and the number returned. Note that this search is simply:
A
A or B
A or B or C
so the results should keep getting greater. But they do not.
(somm & nicotine) = 51
(somm & nicotine) | (somm & BPA) = 188
(somm & nicotine) | (somm & BPA) | (wild & byrne & putative) = 10 (TEN)
I am very impressed with the Foxtrot interface, as well as the feature
set. You have thought of many important functions that other complex
search tools have left out.
I want to buy a license, but a professional search tool must handle the
fundamentals like parsing a fairly simple boolean and returning the
results. I can live with the screen refresh problem i noted earlier, but
not this.
Do you have any idea what is happening and whether there is a workaround?
Removing the & symbols does not help.
|
|
|
|
| Re: boolean search foxtrot pro bug. 5.0 build 1267 [message #223 is a reply to message #221] |
Mon, 25 August 2014 11:57  |
FoxTrot Engineering
Messages: 406
Registered: April 2020
|
Senior Member |
|
|
rwstahlhut«~at~»gmail«|dot|»com wrote:
> I was searching for a group of papers by several authors. Below are the
> searches and the number returned. Note that this search is simply:
>
> A
> A or B
> A or B or C
>
> so the results should keep getting greater. But they do not.
>
> (somm & nicotine) = 51
> (somm & nicotine) | (somm & BPA) = 188
> (somm & nicotine) | (somm & BPA) | (wild & byrne & putative) = 10 (TEN)
FoxTrot does not support this search syntax (parenthesis, & and |).
If you are using the "includes all of the words" operator (as shown in the screenshot of your previous report), then the characters ( & | in your search string are ignored.
If you are using the "matches the search pattern" operator, then the search pattern syntax is explained in the help menu.
Your second search can be performed by searching the following pattern:
somm nicotine | BPA
or by combining two criteria:
[includes all of the words] [somm]
[includes any of the words] [nicotine BPA]
Unfortunately, there is currently no way to perform the last search. We may consider this for a future version though.
Jérôme - CTM Engineering
------------------------------------------------------------ ---------
"Incredibly powerful and useful. If you're thinking "Yeah, I have
Spotlight, and it was free" then think again. FoxTrot is instantaneous.
It lets you do those good boolean searches that Spotlight makes
impossible to do (or to remember how to do). I can't believe how fast
it finds Mail messages, and then shows me the subject line, mailbox
location, and the full text of the message in preview."
FoxTrot Personal Search user comment on www.macupdate.com
Download a demo version from www.foxtrot.ch
------------------------------------------------------------ ---------
Jérôme - FoxTrot Engineering
|
|
|
|
| Re: boolean search foxtrot pro bug. 5.0 build 1267 [message #224 is a reply to message #223] |
Mon, 25 August 2014 16:00 |
rwstahlhut
Messages: 3
Registered: August 2014
|
Junior Member |
|
|
I have never seen a search tool that can do proximity searching, but cannot
do combinations of ands and ors. In the hierarchy of professional search
capabilities, that's not the usual order of things. Unfortunately, I need
to do these more complex searches.
You obviously have the skill. I hope you fill this gap in function. If
you do, please consider adding "NOT" also, which is the other standard
search operator.
> Unfortunately, there is currently no way to perform the last search. We
> may consider this for a future version though.
>
>
> Jérôme - CTM Engineering
>
>
> "Incredibly powerful and useful. If you're thinking "Yeah, I have
> Spotlight, and it was free" then think again. FoxTrot is
> instantaneous.
> It lets you do those good boolean searches that Spotlight makes
> impossible to do (or to remember how to do). I can't believe how fast
> it finds Mail messages, and then shows me the subject line, mailbox
> location, and the full text of the message in preview."
> FoxTrot Personal Search user comment on www.macupdate.com
>
> Download a demo version from www.foxtrot.ch
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: boolean search foxtrot pro bug. 5.0 build 1267 [message #225 is a reply to message #224] |
Mon, 25 August 2014 16:27 |
3DWarlock
Messages: 5
Registered: August 2014
|
Junior Member |
|
|
I absolutely second that. I have tried foxtrot for a few days now and I
have always been looking for a way to combine AND and OR operations
conveniently. Also the only option to combine different search criteria in
foxtrot pro seems to be by an AND-operation. It would really be nice to
have an OR option there.
On Monday, August 25, 2014 4:00:56 PM UTC+2, rwsta...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
> I have never seen a search tool that can do proximity searching, but
> cannot do combinations of ands and ors. In the hierarchy of professional
> search capabilities, that's not the usual order of things. Unfortunately,
> I need to do these more complex searches.
>
> You obviously have the skill. I hope you fill this gap in function. If
> you do, please consider adding "NOT" also, which is the other standard
> search operator.
>
>
>
>> Unfortunately, there is currently no way to perform the last search. We
>> may consider this for a future version though.
>>
>>
>> Jérôme - CTM Engineering
>>
>>
>> "Incredibly powerful and useful. If you're thinking "Yeah, I have
>> Spotlight, and it was free" then think again. FoxTrot is
>> instantaneous.
>> It lets you do those good boolean searches that Spotlight makes
>> impossible to do (or to remember how to do). I can't believe how fast
>> it finds Mail messages, and then shows me the subject line, mailbox
>> location, and the full text of the message in preview."
>> FoxTrot Personal Search user comment on www.macupdate.com
>>
>> Download a demo version from www.foxtrot.ch
>>
>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: boolean search foxtrot pro bug. 5.0 build 1267 [message #227 is a reply to message #224] |
Mon, 25 August 2014 20:04 |
FoxTrot Engineering
Messages: 406
Registered: April 2020
|
Senior Member |
|
|
rwstahlhut«~at~»gmail«|dot|»com wrote:
> I hope you fill this gap in function. If
> you do, please consider adding "NOT" also, which is the other standard
> search operator.
You can already exclude documents containing certains words, or groups of consecutive words, using the "-" operator in the search pattern, or by using the [does not include any of the words] criterion.
Are there some other things for which a true NOT operator would be useful?
Would it be sufficient for you if we add an [all criteria] / [at least one criterion] switch, when using multiple criteria (or the equivalent in the search pattern syntax, like [matches the search pattern] [ (somm nicotine) | (somm BPA) | (wild byrne putative) ] ? Or is there some real cases where you actually need multiple level of parenthesis?
Jérôme - CTM Engineering
------------------------------------------------------------ ---------
"Foxtrot Professional Search is a fantastic application. I simply
couldn't live without it."
FoxTrot Professional Search user comment
Download a demo version from www.foxtrot.ch
------------------------------------------------------------ ---------
Jérôme - FoxTrot Engineering
|
|
|
|
| Re: boolean search foxtrot pro bug. 5.0 build 1267 [message #228 is a reply to message #227] |
Tue, 26 August 2014 13:01 |
3DWarlock
Messages: 5
Registered: August 2014
|
Junior Member |
|
|
Looking at how the foxtrot pro interface is designed right now (for
multiple criteria search) I think it would be a step in the right direction
to include a [all criteria] / [at least one criterion] switch. This would
not mess with the current design philosophy behind foxtrot pro and would
offer a wide range of new search options.
On Monday, August 25, 2014 8:04:22 PM UTC+2, FoxTrot Engineering wrote:
>
> rwsta...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> I hope you fill this gap in function. If
>> you do, please consider adding "NOT" also, which is the other standard
>> search operator.
>
> You can already exclude documents containing certains words, or groups of
> consecutive words, using the "-" operator in the search pattern, or by
> using the [does not include any of the words] criterion.
>
> Are there some other things for which a true NOT operator would be useful?
>
> Would it be sufficient for you if we add an [all criteria] / [at least one
> criterion] switch, when using multiple criteria (or the equivalent in the
> search pattern syntax, like [matches the search pattern] [ (somm nicotine)
> | (somm BPA) | (wild byrne putative) ] ? Or is there some real cases where
> you actually need multiple level of parenthesis?
>
>
> Jérôme - CTM Engineering
>
>
> "Foxtrot Professional Search is a fantastic application. I simply
> couldn't live without it."
> FoxTrot Professional Search user comment
>
> Download a demo version from www.foxtrot.ch
>
>
>
|
|
|
|
] 
FoxTrot Search Forum
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
