Jump to content

Jakub Sypiański

Member
  • Content Count

    21
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Jakub Sypiański

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. My sincere thanks. I am learning a lot about how Alfred works from your replies. However, I still have an impression that if Alfred allowed prefixes to be turned on in individual workflows, it would not interfere with other workflows, unless the user makes it interfere. Actually, I don't have a Workflow. I just have these 250+ Web Searches in the relevant tab of Alfred settings. I will think if I am able to transform these into a workflow (but I don't even see an option in Alfred to copy or export these searches). If it wasn't clear already, I don't know anything about coding and the technology behind Alfred. The attached screenshot shows what I mean by "cycling": the possibility to type ;a and to see all my prefixes starting with ;a. It seems to me that it's a behaviour that cannot be replicated otherwise. But perhaps I'm wrong?
  2. You have good arguments for not using such optional suffixes. But you have only one good argument for not implementing such optional suffixes: lack of interest. It’s not worth it to spend time on a feature that won’t be used by many. However, I would argue that a thread such as this is not representative. People may not even realise this feature is possibly useful. We are very much used to prefixes as keywords. On the other hand, perhaps it wouldn’t be very difficult to implement? I have no idea. @vitor 1. Thank you for the workflow. Indeed I didn’t realise that it would work that way. I will use your workflow, but it doesn’t solve the crucial issue: I cannot cycle through all my keywords that way (and memorising all 250+ of them it's just not worth it). This would be possible only with suffixes. 2. As we both now these interfering keywords are easily avoidable by the use of non-word keywords. One general solution would be to require a double space before the keyword. Fast to type and efficient. Anyway, such prefixes would be optional.
  3. Why can't I edit my post? Although I can edit this one?
  4. I am a bit disappointed by your suggestions but thank you anyway. I already make use of the keyboard shortcuts you mention. But if I didn’t consider it a problem, I would not have asked about the possibility. I use Web Searches for 184 dictionaries, 34 library catalogues, 11 research tools as well as other things. To this can be added several workflows that are based on search queries. It means that I use Alfred searches in my research several hundred times a day. A huge proportion of this searches is performed through invoking Alfred, returning to the beginning of the line and changing the prefix. This in itself is enough for me to advocate for implementing the optional suffix-model. The suffix-model would allow not only to modify the search keyword more quickly but also to be able to use all the suggestions. Example: my prefixes for dictionaries are coded as `{;}{first letter of language 1}{first letter of language 2}{first letter fo dictionary’s name}`. For instance: `;aew` for Arabic–English WordReference. It allows me to first choose the language pair and then cycle through all available dictionaries. Now, having suffixes would allow me to use this extremely helpful cycling feature also while the word is already in Alfred search box. Believe me, I never choose a dictionary BEFORE knowing what word I want to look up. Moreover, having suffixes would allow having a global keyboard shortcut for taking the text selected in Alfred and then choosing what to do with it, while taking advantage of keyword cycling and their easy replacement. My prefixes always start with a special sign (for example `;` for dictionaries), so this problem can hardly ever occur. And one's keywords are all one letter, no problem, I propose this as an optional feature. Unfortunately, not possible, because my keywords have between two and five letters and I don't feel like making them all five letter.
  5. To search something in Alfred, either through "Web search" or using workflows we write `{prefix} {my query}`, for example `map Warsaw`. In most cases however it would be preferable to write `{my query} {suffix}`. The advantage is that it is much easier to change the decision about the suffix than about the prefix. So if I search `map Byzantium` and Google Maps can't find it, I can change my decision, invoke Alfred again, press ↑ and change the suffix of search engine just with few keystrokes. At the moment I have to press ↑, go to the beginning of the line and then change the suffix. I can't see any disadvantages. We always know what we are looking for (query), but sometimes we are not sure what we what to look it with. Does the contrary ever happen? The added value of this solution is that in some workflows with dynamic searches we wouldn't have to add "." at the end of the query to perform the query (which is required now to prevent premature launching of a dynamic search).
  6. Great workflow, thank you! It would be even more fantastic to have a version for Libgen's articles.
  7. Thank you. I know nothing about python (or programming) and I use terminal very occasionally, but I think I managed to install both pip and requests. However, I have got some errors and the following message in the debugger when I tried to run the workflow. 1. Errors about pip and requests. 2. Workflow's debugger
  8. Am I the only one for whom it doesn't work? Ulysses 15.2, Alfred 3.8.1, workflow 1.0.4. Edit: 1. What I wanted to achieve: to use any of the commands. 2. What happened instead: the error message above pasted, similar to those mentioned in posts from last year. 3. What does debugger show:
  9. I looked on the Internet and on the forum for "install requests (alfred workflow)", but I haven't figured out what it is that I should do. As for the debugger:
  10. Thank you for pointing it to me, I'm new. But I have no idea where to put it otherwise. There is no general Zotero-related thread. Should I create a new separate thread for this zotero-better-bibtex-alfred workflow?
  11. I guess this workflow is supposed to do what you (and me, actually), need. Unfortunately, it doesn't work for me.
  12. Thank you! I tried renaming the zipped repo to _.alfredworkflow_, but I haven't figured out that I need to extract and rezip it first. What a pity the workflow itself turns out not to work...
  13. I found a workflow on github that I desperately need, but it is not an .alfredworkflow file. What should I do to install it?
  14. I have many many custom Web Searches added. It would be very useful to be able to organise them in Alfred into folders in exactly the same way as we can do with Snippets.
  15. I'm trying to add text selection as input to the workflow, but my skills seem to be too basic. Is it possible to do it?
×
×
  • Create New...