advanced_search_result.php

[ReneH4]

I just noticed this line in who's online:

Code: Select all

advanced_search_result.php?keywords=m8&search_in_description=0

Obviously someone looking for M8.

But the search_in_description=0 part triggered me.

Where is it set to "0", and how can it be set to "1"?

I set it to "1" by hand and it gave me better results.

I'm on 1.0.7.9. by the way.

[ecartz]

It is set to 1 already at advanced_search.php

It is not set at all in the header module. You could edit the template to add it.

It is set to 0 only in the sidebox, which it doesn't look like you have.

I wonder if someone set it to 0 manually in order to get fewer results. I mean if they are looking for an M8 bolt, then they wouldn't want to see a part that takes an M8 bolt like https://honda4parts.nl/product_info.php ... ts_id=2738

Outside of core, it may be set in the thing that does your typeahead search. Since that looks for name matches, it would make sense to restrict it to only searching in the name.

[ReneH4]

Matt, thanks for your time.

It is set to 1 already at advanced_search.php

I see now:

Code: Select all

      echo tep_draw_hidden_field('search_in_description', '1');

It is not set at all in the header module. You could edit the template to add it.

I understand.

It is set to 0 only in the sidebox, which it doesn't look like you have.

Correct I do not have it in the sidebox.

I wonder if someone set it to 0 manually in order to get fewer results. I mean if they are looking for an M8 bolt, then they wouldn't want to see a part that takes an M8 bolt like https://honda4parts.nl/product_info.php ... ts_id=2738

Well, that depends, but in most cases it would not be usefull indeed.

Outside of core, it may be set in the thing that does your typeahead search. Since that looks for name matches, it would make sense to restrict it to only searching in the name.

I guess that's it indeed. The settings of the type-ahead search are a small study, I found the setting that shows in the screenshot.

Cuirosity healed, thanks again Matt!