## enhancement idea 💡 add a `raw body` search field to search the entire body (including HTML/CSS code) at all applicable places: * **filters** * **Search Messages** (SHIFT+CTRL+F): *see attached design mockup* * **Quick Filter**: `raw body` could be omitted here for [ux-minimalism](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describekeywords.cgi#ux-minimalism) or replicated for [ux-consistency](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describekeywords.cgi#ux-consistency) and [ux-control](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describekeywords.cgi#ux-control). ## rationale The behavior of the `body` field changed over the years: In the early years it included the entire body (everything), later it excluded HTML/CSS code. There have been requests on both sides. By implementing this idea, both camps can use the field they need without adding [yet-another-preference](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=589458) (bug 589458). ## credits/origin This idea occurred to me independently but was first mentioned in .............. in bug ................ (TBD) and to my knowledge never formally submitted as a feature request.
Bug 1906516 Comment 0 Edit History
Note: The actual edited comment in the bug view page will always show the original commenter’s name and original timestamp.
## enhancement idea 💡 add a `raw body` search field to search the entire body (including HTML/CSS code) at all applicable places: * **filters** * **Search Messages** (SHIFT+CTRL+F): *see design mockup above* * **Quick Filter**: `raw body` could be omitted here for [ux-minimalism](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describekeywords.cgi#ux-minimalism) or replicated for [ux-consistency](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describekeywords.cgi#ux-consistency) and [ux-control](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describekeywords.cgi#ux-control). ## rationale The behavior of the `body` field changed over the years: In the early years it included the entire body (everything), later it excluded HTML/CSS code. There have been requests on both sides. By implementing this idea, both camps can use the field they need without adding [yet-another-preference](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=589458) (bug 589458). ## credits/origin This idea occurred to me independently but was first mentioned in .............. in bug ................ (TBD) and to my knowledge never formally submitted as a feature request.
## enhancement idea 💡 add a `raw body` search field to search the entire body (including HTML/CSS code) at all applicable places: * **filters** * **Search Messages** (SHIFT+CTRL+F): *see design mockup above* * **Quick Filter**: `raw body` could be omitted here for [ux-minimalism](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describekeywords.cgi#ux-minimalism) or replicated for [ux-consistency](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describekeywords.cgi#ux-consistency) and [ux-control](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describekeywords.cgi#ux-control). ## rationale The behavior of the `body` field changed over the years: In the early years it included the entire body (everything), later it excluded HTML/CSS code. There have been requests on both sides. By implementing this idea, both camps can use the field they need without adding [yet-another-preference](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=589458) (bug 589458), which annoyingly would have to be frequently changed back-and-forth. ## credits/origin This idea occurred to me independently but was first mentioned in .............. in bug ................ (TBD) and to my knowledge never formally submitted as a feature request.
## enhancement idea 💡 add a `raw body` search field to search the entire body (including HTML/CSS code) at all applicable places: * **filters** * **Search Messages** (SHIFT+CTRL+F): *see design mockup above* * **Quick Filter**: `raw body` could be omitted here for [ux-minimalism](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describekeywords.cgi#ux-minimalism) or replicated for [ux-consistency](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describekeywords.cgi#ux-consistency) and [ux-control](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describekeywords.cgi#ux-control). ## rationale The behavior of the `body` field changed over the years: In the early years it included the entire body (everything), later it excluded HTML/CSS code. There have been requests on both sides. By implementing this idea, both camps can use the field they need without adding [yet-another-preference](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=589458) (bug 589458), which would have to be frequently changed back-and-forth (cumbersome, not ux-efficient). ## credits/origin This idea occurred to me independently but was first mentioned in .............. in bug ................ (TBD) and to my knowledge never formally submitted as a feature request.
## enhancement idea 💡 add a `raw body` search field to search the entire body (including HTML/CSS code) at all applicable places: * **Search Messages** (SHIFT+CTRL+F): *see design mockup above* * **filters**: this is bug 453385 * **Quick Filter**: `raw body` could be omitted here for [ux-minimalism](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describekeywords.cgi#ux-minimalism) or replicated for [ux-consistency](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describekeywords.cgi#ux-consistency) and [ux-control](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describekeywords.cgi#ux-control). ## rationale The behavior of the `body` field changed over the years: In the early years it included the entire body (everything), later it excluded HTML/CSS code. There have been requests on both sides. By implementing this idea, both camps can use the field they need without adding [yet-another-preference](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=589458) (bug 589458), which would have to be frequently changed back-and-forth (cumbersome, not ux-efficient). ## credits/origin This idea occurred to me independently but was first mentioned in .............. in bug ................ (TBD) and to my knowledge never formally submitted as a feature request.
## enhancement idea 💡 add a `raw body` search field to search the entire body (including HTML/CSS code) at all applicable places: * **Search Messages** (SHIFT+CTRL+F): *see design mockup above* * **filters**: this is bug 453385 * **Quick Filter**: `raw body` could be omitted here for [ux-minimalism](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describekeywords.cgi#ux-minimalism) or replicated for [ux-consistency](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describekeywords.cgi#ux-consistency) and [ux-control](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describekeywords.cgi#ux-control). ## rationale The behavior of the `body` field changed over the years: In the early years it included the entire body (everything), later it excluded HTML/CSS code. There have been requests on both sides. By implementing this idea, both camps can use the field they need without adding [yet-another-preference](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=589458) (bug 589458), which would have to be frequently changed back-and-forth (cumbersome, not ux-efficient). ## credits/origin This idea occurred to me independently but was first mentioned in .............. in bug ................ (TBD).
## enhancement idea 💡 add a `raw body` search field to search the entire body (including HTML/CSS code) at all applicable places: * **Search Messages** (SHIFT+CTRL+F): *see design mockup above* proposed in bug 1211128 ([comment #10](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1211128#c10) and [comment #14](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1211128#c14)) but to my knowledge there is no bug for this yet * **filters**: this is bug 453385 * **Quick Filter**: `raw body` could be omitted here for [ux-minimalism](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describekeywords.cgi#ux-minimalism) or replicated for [ux-consistency](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describekeywords.cgi#ux-consistency) and [ux-control](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describekeywords.cgi#ux-control). ## rationale The behavior of the `body` field changed over the years: In the early years it included the entire body (everything), later it excluded HTML/CSS code. There have been requests on both sides. By implementing this idea, both camps can use the field they need without adding [yet-another-preference](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=589458) (bug 589458), which would have to be frequently changed back-and-forth (cumbersome, not ux-efficient).
## enhancement idea 💡 add a `raw body` search field to search the entire body (including HTML/CSS code) at all applicable places: * **Search Messages** (SHIFT+CTRL+F): *see design mockup above* proposed in [comment #10](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1211128#c10) of bug 1211128 but to my knowledge there is no bug for this yet * **filters**: this is bug 453385 * **Quick Filter**: `raw body` could be omitted here for [ux-minimalism](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describekeywords.cgi#ux-minimalism) or replicated for [ux-consistency](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describekeywords.cgi#ux-consistency) and [ux-control](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describekeywords.cgi#ux-control). ## rationale The behavior of the `body` field changed over the years: In the early years it included the entire body (everything), later it excluded HTML/CSS code. There have been requests on both sides. By implementing this idea, both camps can use the field they need without adding [yet-another-preference](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=589458) (bug 589458), which would have to be frequently changed back-and-forth (cumbersome, not ux-efficient).
## enhancement idea 💡 add a `raw body` search field to search the entire body (including HTML/CSS code) at all applicable places: * **Search Messages** (SHIFT+CTRL+F): *see design mockup above* proposed in [comment #10](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1211128#c10) of bug 1211128 but to my knowledge there is no bug for this yet * **filters**: this is bug 453385 * **Quick Filter**: `raw body` could be omitted here for [ux-minimalism](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describekeywords.cgi#ux-minimalism) or replicated for [ux-consistency](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describekeywords.cgi#ux-consistency) and [ux-control](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describekeywords.cgi#ux-control). ## rationale The behavior of the `body` field changed over the years: In the early years it included the entire body (everything), later it excluded HTML/CSS code. There have been requests on both sides. By implementing this idea, both camps can use the field they need without adding [yet-another-preference](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=589458) (bug 589458), which would have to be frequently changed back-and-forth (cumbersome, not [ux-efficient](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describekeywords.cgi#ux-efficiency)).
## enhancement idea 💡 add a `raw body` search field to search the entire body (including HTML/CSS code) at all applicable places: * **Search Messages** (SHIFT+CTRL+F): *see design mockup above* proposed in comments [#10](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1211128#c10) and [#14](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1211128#c14) of bug 1211128 but to my knowledge there is no bug for this yet * **filters**: this is bug 453385 * **Quick Filter**: `raw body` could be omitted here for [ux-minimalism](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describekeywords.cgi#ux-minimalism) or replicated for [ux-consistency](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describekeywords.cgi#ux-consistency) and [ux-control](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describekeywords.cgi#ux-control). ## rationale The behavior of the `body` field changed over the years: In the early years it included the entire body (everything), later it excluded HTML/CSS code. There have been requests on both sides. By implementing this idea, both camps can use the field they need without adding [yet-another-preference](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=589458) (bug 589458), which would have to be frequently changed back-and-forth (cumbersome, not [ux-efficient](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describekeywords.cgi#ux-efficiency)).