Re^2: Extending "Nodes you wrote" (one-click SS)

Using Super Search via the link you provided would be much more than "two clicks". But one can make it as easy as clicking Nodes you wrote by constructing a link for one's self like: ?node_id=3989;a=tye;go=1;as_user=tye.

If I click that link, I get shown a list of my own nodes. If anybody but me clicks it, they get a Super Search form pre-loaded so that if they click "Search" they will then get a list of my nodes. The as_user is required for a link to immediately perform the search in order to prevent, for example, search engine spiders from performing 'super searches' over and over.

LanX might like the following links: His nodes: ?node_id=3989;a=LanX;go=1;as_user=LanX, his root nodes ?node_id=3989;a=LanX;re=N;go=1;as_user=LanX, his non-SoPW nodes: ?node_id=3989;a=LanX;xs=1;Wi;go=1;as_user=LanX (since replies and SoPW nodes are, by far, the two biggest sources of chaff when that isn't what you were looking for).

But I can see reasons for still preferring to use my writeups. I look forward to seeing patches implementing a user setting that enables compact "parent" and "root" links for each id:// link or for adding very compact links to my writeups.

I like the idea of doing the links like "Re^2: Subject" where "Re" links to the parent and the depth indicator links to the root node and "Subject" is the node title with the "Re^$N: " removed. If a node's title doesn't match /^Re(^\d+)?: /, then "Re^?:" could be prepended to the full node title.

For id://...|text links, we probably just shouldn't add the extra links since such didn't previously query information about the IDed node.

- tye

Comment on Re^2: Extending "Nodes you wrote" (one-click SS) Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Extending "Nodes you wrote" (one-click SS) by LanX (Saint) on Oct 21, 2010 at 16:15 UTC
Thx! Just three questions: > ...His nodes: ?node_id=3989;a=LanX;go=1;as_user=LanX, How can I change this query to see the newest nodes descending instead of the oldest ascending? > like "Re^2: Subject" where "Re" links to the parent and the depth indicator links to the root node Wouldn't it be better to stay consistent with the interface of RAT where `(P)` stands for the parent node? For instance I find it confusing in the UserSearch that clicking on "Re:SoPW" leads to the parent node! (and clicking "SoPW" for a root node produces an "Permission Denied" of a superdoc). You could chose `<sup>(P)(T)</sup>` to enrich `[by://]` links, like that Re^2: Extending "Nodes you wrote" (one-click SS)^(P)(T) And please also consider Parent/Root-links for voteviews: http://perlmonks.org/?node_id=708738;displaytype=voteview. Cheers Rolf	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^4: Extending "Nodes you wrote" (one-click SS) by tye (Sage) on Oct 21, 2010 at 17:15 UTC
Super Search shows you the parameters for the search you performed so look it up yourself. No, I don't like that Super Search links to restricted-access nodes as part of documenting what section a node was posted to. But, no, I don't like RAT's interface; "P" and "T" don't mean much to me. "Re" is only present if a node is a reply so it makes sense for "Re" to link to the parent that the node is "Re" to. "^4" is only present if the node is a deep reply and it makes sense for a link to the root to only be present when "^4" is present and a link that goes "up 4 levels" to the root seems reasonable to display as "^4". RAT's and my choices are both compact interfaces that are easy to remember when you are used to them. Hover text helps in both cases (perhaps the new links won't have hover text with double-escape brackets, though). But I find my choice even easier to remember because what the links go to is actually determined by when the links would be present (as well as being more compact). - tye	[reply]
Re^5: Extending "Nodes you wrote" (one-click SS) by LanX (Saint) on Oct 21, 2010 at 17:28 UTC
> Super Search shows you the parameters for the search you performed so look it up yourself. I wouldn't ask if it was that easy (or self documenting)! Cheers Rolf	[reply]