gingerbeardman Posted November 25, 2021 Share Posted November 25, 2021 (edited) I have a workflow titled "TTLP" If I search/filter workflow list in preferences using the text "TT" it will be found If I search/filter workflow list in preferences using the text "LP" it will not be found My expectation is that the search should filter items that "contain" the search text, but it seems that the search filters some other way. This also happens if I use the "Search Preferences" field to search for the workflow "TTLP". Another example, I search for the "Amazon Suggest" workflow using the text "Suggest" it will be found. But if I use "uggest" it will not be found. And finally, it's confusing that "LP" search is matching the end of the "help" keyword in the "Searchio!" workflow, but it does not match the end of the word "TTLP". I think this is a real bug, even if the others above are not considered bugs. Edited November 25, 2021 by gingerbeardman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Posted November 25, 2021 Share Posted November 25, 2021 4 hours ago, gingerbeardman said: My expectation is that the search should filter items that "contain" the search text This isn't the case throughout Alfred, mid-word partial matching would create over-saturated results which become of low use when it comes to relevance sorting and matching. I see an oddity in the second screenshot - "lp" matching "help" for the Searchio! workflow, keyword matches are anchored too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gingerbeardman Posted November 25, 2021 Author Share Posted November 25, 2021 By oddity I guess you mean bug Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gingerbeardman Posted November 25, 2021 Author Share Posted November 25, 2021 (edited) I had just finished editing the post when you posted your reply. I appreciate that partial matches will generate more results. If matches are only supposed to be the beginning, I see two oddities: "lp" matching the end of "help" in Searchio! but not the end of "TTLP" "Suggest" matching "Amazon Suggest" Usually with search it's possible to figure out the rules if they are not stated, but here I cannot figure them out as search seems inconsistent. Edited November 25, 2021 by gingerbeardman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Posted November 25, 2021 Share Posted November 25, 2021 1 minute ago, gingerbeardman said: "Suggest" matching "Amazon Suggest" Alfred doesn't do mid-word matching, he does word-based matching, so "suggest" is correct here. This is the same way "chrome" would match Google Chrome in Alfred's default results. As for lp matching help in the Searchio! workflow, I'm looking into this now. Alfred matches on quite a few additional things within the workflow such as hotkeys, certain variable values. For any other workflows, do you get mid-keyword matching? (e.g. if the keyword was 'google', do you see 'oogle' matching?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Posted November 25, 2021 Share Posted November 25, 2021 It appears that there is arbitrary matching on External Trigger IDs in the Workflow Preferences search field. Searchio! has an external trigger with id help and this is what is matching lp. I will fix this so external trigger searching is anchored in the next build. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gingerbeardman Posted November 25, 2021 Author Share Posted November 25, 2021 (edited) Thanks, that should make things more consistent and predictable. I do see matches for other trigger ids across all my workflows, as you suspected. Edited November 25, 2021 by gingerbeardman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanishe Posted November 25, 2021 Share Posted November 25, 2021 5 hours ago, Andrew said: keyword matches are anchored too. It's not a keyword, it's the name of an External Trigger. Alfred appears to be using "contains substring" matching on those. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Posted November 26, 2021 Share Posted November 26, 2021 @deanishe that's exactly what I deduced in my last post, and have already fixed for the next build. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanishe Posted November 26, 2021 Share Posted November 26, 2021 9 hours ago, Andrew said: @deanishe that's exactly what I deduced in my last post, and have already fixed for the next build. Oh, right, sorry. I still had the older version of the page open when I posted my reply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gingerbeardman Posted December 2, 2021 Author Share Posted December 2, 2021 Thanks for the fix in 4.6.1, feel free to close. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now