-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 56
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Multiple select widgets for the same index overwrite each other #53
Comments
Yes. On the other hand we use this feature-o-bug to restrict the default query: For example, you want to create a faceted navigable that displays only Pages, News and Events. But you still want to let the user to filter by portal_type:
This way this page displays by default only Pages, News and Events and still, the final user can filter between these types. |
Couldn't the AND behavior proposed by the OP be at least implemented as an option? I mean, there could be an option to configure whether the behaviour would be AND or replace. I am trying to set up a nav page in which the user will choose "subject" from a widget, and "business process" from another one. Both classifications are implemented by using Tags, so the content editor would tag the item with a tag from a "subject" set and a tag from the "business process" set. I implemented vocabularies for both sets, so each of them could feed a Checkboxes or Tag cloud widget. But the user won't be able to filter by both sets at the same time, to see only the content items that are tagged as subject A AND business process X, for instance. |
Actually it does not work as expected for me. The resulting query (which should only contain one term) contains all the terms in an or condition. Is that a different bug? |
Multiple select widgets for the same index overwrite each other. The offending line is in
.../browser/app/query.py
:query.update(widget.query(kwargs))
For me it's much more useful if they AND rather than overwriting each other. For example, the following code iterates through every key in the new query. If it's also present in the old query it can convert it to a dictionary query with the 'and' operator, and concatenate the two together:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: