http://qs321.pair.com?node_id=55085

1. While I know there's a problem with editing certain nodes (root nodes?). Is there any hope this will get fixed? I like the ability to update my nodes, but have had to resort to posting replies to myself. Which seems more than a little weird. I'm not that neurotic. :)

2. Can we have a flag added to Super Search that lets you exclude your criteria? For example, suppose I want to look for nodes containing the words "search engine" and don't want to see ones that I've posted. Or, supose I want to see nodes containing merlyn without catching his signature.

Thanks for your time.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Two requests (super search)
by lemming (Priest) on Jan 30, 2001 at 02:00 UTC
    While we're the topic of Super Search:
    1. How about a way for limiting ones search to root nodes?

    Update: tye pointed out if you check all the boxes except for Notes, it demonstrates this behaviour.
    lemming chants "read the docs, read the docs, look at the interface..."
      On the other hand, is there a way to limit one's search to nodes including responses in a certain section?

      It seems that responses to nodes always end up in the "Note" section, rather than the section of the root node.

Re: Two requests
by turnstep (Parson) on Jan 30, 2001 at 02:32 UTC
    The issue of editing root nodes is considered a feature, and not a bug. I don't totally agree with the policy, but I do understand the reasons for it. Changing a top-level node can cause havoc (or at least some extreme out-of-context replies). Hence, the mighty "Preview" tag. Some top-level nodes *can* be edited (e.g. snippets) but in general, you just have to be really careful. Extreme errors can be changed by making a petition to the gods. For minor ones, replying to yourself is sometimes the best way to go.

    Don't worry about making a post you later regretted or really, really wanted to edit - we've all done the same. Consider it a rite of passage. :)