[TYPO3-english] browsebox in indexed_search still not working

[Patrick Schriner]

Hi Stephan,

tbh I don't like indexed_search that much, and think it's not in the best  
of shapes.
First time I had to use it, I spent months to get it where I needed it.  
E.g. that whole concept of: If you use user groups, than you need a  
configuration for every possible configuration is aweful. DAM support is  
terrible too. But - all that can be solved - because it's open source, and  
fixing / adjusting things *is* possible.

Regarding the output of indexed_search: As that is a known issue, there is  
ongoing effort on forge (http://forge.typo3.org/projects/typo3v4-search)  
to provide a new, Extbase / FLUID based frontend that is more accessible  
as well - and to use fulltext support when possible (another MUST if you  
have many pages & a large index). You might want to take a look at that  
project's progress.

It does help to watch firebug / dragonfly and the likes for Javascript  
errors.

Btw: Solr is an awesome alternative, but sometimes tricky / picky to setup  
as well.

Sorry that you had such a rough experience with indexed_search.
There are parts of TYPO3 that are in less-than-ideal shape and can cause  
frustration when first encountered, but imho the same applies to any  
larger project (e.g. Eclipse is excellent as a JAVA IDE, but the WTP is in  
part pretty bad).

Patrick

On Fri, 09 Mar 2012 08:30:26 +0100, Stephan Bernhard <grac at gmx.ch> wrote:

> @ patrick, and @ all from the core-"team"
>
>
> On 08.03.2012 15:40, Patrick Schriner wrote:
>>>> In my experience, the most frequent cause is: Two search boxes (e.g.  
>>>> on
>>>> the right, and above the content) - and the submit fails miserably (or
>>>> behaves strangely), due to a clash of IDs.
>>>
>>> what do you suggest?
>>
>> Usually I use different templates and they use different IDs and classes
>> (inconvenient, I know).
>>
>> In more extrem cases I have used Javascript to transfer variables /
>> submit the other form.
>
>
> so my questions remain:
>
> - why is an old EXT which isn't conform with CSS and HTML rules still  
> part of the CORE code of 4.5, which has the label "LongTermSupport"?
>
> - why would i first have to find out what's wrong and then be forced to  
> change manually what is supposed to work out-of-the-box?
>
> - and why is there no notice about the not-functionning of the browsebox?
>
>
> stephan