`Search messages` (Ctrl+Shift+ F search dialog): searching `body` field should exclude HTML/CSS code
Categories
(Thunderbird :: Search, defect)
Tracking
(Not tracked)
People
(Reporter: rap.tors, Unassigned)
References
Details
(Keywords: reproducible)
Attachments
(2 files)
Capture.JPG
User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:127.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/127.0
Steps to reproduce:
Search for messages in a folder (search dialog): Ctrl + Shift + F to search all folders
Actual results:
Most results totally irrelevant as one of the search criteria NOT MET. Waste of time. NONE of the messages shown in screenshot contain the string 'height'
Expected results:
The app should do what it promises to do.
@ F. Ehrhardt : Thanks for your report.
Have you looked into the source ? If not, please follow these steps:
- in your results: select one of the messages (which should not contain the term "height")
- click on
open in folder - press
CTRL+U - press
CTRL+F - deselect all checkboxes
- in the text box: write
height
What do you see now? Does the text box turn red and does the search bar display phrase not found ?
|
||
Comment 2•1 year ago
|
||
It is likely finding html syntax elements.
Some items in this list https://mzl.la/3RFqSWI may be interesting
|
Reporter | |
Comment 3•1 year ago
|
||
(In reply to chrizilla from comment #1)
@ F. Ehrhardt : Thanks for your report.
Have you looked into the source ? If not, please follow these steps:
- in your results: select one of the messages (which should not contain the term "height")
- click on
open in folder- press
CTRL+U- press
CTRL+F- deselect all checkboxes
- in the text box: write
heightWhat do you see now? Does the text box turn red and does the search bar display
phrase not found?
Thanks for responding. Results (see screenshot) - well, sure, there's the string.
But it seems crazy that this behavior is condoned. Of the hundreds of millions of messages read on Tbird every day, how many would users examine the soUrce?
If there's a rationale for searching all the header gobbledegook, especially by default, I'd like to hear it. IMAO it really makes a search of body text frustrating and un-helpful.
|
||
Updated•1 year ago
|
(In reply to F. Ehrhardt from comment #3)
Thanks for responding. Results (see screenshot) - well, sure, there's the string.
But it seems crazy […] it really makes a search of body text frustrating and un-helpful.
You are right that it would be a good idea to add a search for body (excluding HTML/CSS code) (maybe needs a user-friendlier name).
I haven't found any existing bug for this. You could file an enhancement request. If you do, please check for duplicates first. Thank you.
Bug 1737474 makes the same request for Quick Filter.
@F. Ehrhardt (reporter): Thanks for your bug report.
This seems to be a duplicate of bug 628098, which also requests that searching the body field should exclude HTML/CSS code.
You can follow its progress and contribute relevant information there.
If you disagree, you can REOPEN your bug and state differences. Thank you.
Description
•