This page is not created by, affiliated with, or supported by Slack Technologies, Inc.
- # announcements (54)
- # asami (3)
- # aws (5)
- # babashka (8)
- # beginners (64)
- # biff (27)
- # calva (11)
- # cider (41)
- # clj-otel (7)
- # cljdoc (72)
- # clojars (20)
- # clojure (159)
- # clojure-austin (3)
- # clojure-europe (143)
- # clojure-italy (1)
- # clojure-nl (5)
- # clojure-norway (3)
- # clojure-uk (3)
- # clojurescript (19)
- # community-development (1)
- # core-typed (5)
- # cursive (3)
- # datalevin (1)
- # datomic (8)
- # emacs (13)
- # fulcro (4)
- # google-cloud (4)
- # honeysql (25)
- # java (1)
- # jobs (1)
- # lambdaisland (3)
- # lsp (121)
- # off-topic (52)
- # other-languages (1)
- # re-frame (3)
- # releases (2)
- # remote-jobs (1)
- # shadow-cljs (36)
- # sql (4)
- # xtdb (36)
TIL - a thing called https://datacadamia.com/web/search/opensearch exists and cljdoc supports it. As a noob, I’m curious to learn more how this is used by cljdoc users. Is is just from their browsers?
https://github.com/cljdoc/cljdoc/issues/186#issuecomment-439658893… I bet @vincent.cantin can enlighten me!
trying to figure out if this would be useful to in-docset (not sure the word here but it's the docs for a group+artifact+version) search
I'm thinking not?
Ah yes. We should come up with some user-meaningful terms for server-side vs client-side searching, if that’s what you are getting at? I’m gonna guess the term “docset” comes from maybe https://kapeli.com/dash? I’d not heard it before my time on cljdoc.
I'm not sure I've just seen it in cljdoc
but it makes sense for me as a term for a specific package version's docs as a whole
in my branch I've been calling the docset that's been split up for easier searching a searchset
I think it might have let our geek-speak slip through to the user? Or maybe not, if it is a meaningful term…
I'm good with these definitions, and I think they make sense? ¯\(ツ)/¯
We don’t want to imply that the server side search also searches within docs. Nor do we want to imply that the client side search finds libraries. Hmmm… Maybe “libraries search” vs “in-doc search”?
Well we’d both never heard of a docset prior to cljdoc, so… I dunno. But if we define the term I think it’d be fine.
a library... hmm
it's sort of a library finder
libraries search works for now
Yeah, I think library is better than jar only because we’d like to search more than just jars. (source-based libs someday).
maybe libraries search vs doc search
I'm on-board with that
maybe your initial impulse was right
or in-library search?
I do really like docset
and I'd be ok with introducing that language to users
we can call it a docker
i'm good with that
But not sure if it does the job, really, as a user I might assume I am searching in all docsets. I think our shorthands are good, but a little text might help in the UI.
we really need a term for group + artifact + version
but a coordinate is a location of a thing but not the actual thing
single docset search
I like it
and I googled and docset is in use by dash but also by doxygen
seems like conceptually this is a thing we can use
also calling it single docset search leaves us open for later having multi-docset search
the wording still works, I mean
and it leaves it open to further search enhancements for finding libraries
instead of like coordinate search or something
that would be limited
I’m thinking maybe we should summarize this in a git issue? For posterity. And with action item of updating any user-facing docs and ui.
i'm with ya
soonest I could do that is tomorrow tho
unless you have time
My pleasure. And as always, a pleasure chatting/working with you @corasaurus-hex!
and likewise 💜