Re: Isolating search urls, posted by Philip Leung on Thu Aug 13 10:06:23 2015
|
Thanks for the quick response!
It's great to hear that multi-threading is in the works as this has been my main issue with an otherwise very nice piece of software. I do,
however, feel like we should be able to get my slightly hacky approach to work to hold us over until you finish. |
|
Re: Isolating search urls, posted by Philip Leung on Mon Aug 17 10:32:51 2015
|
Is there no good way of differentiating search operations from others by URL?
Philip
Leung wrote:
Thanks for the quick response! |
|
Re: Isolating search urls, posted by Stefan Ritt on Mon Aug 17 10:41:22 2015
|
Look for "&subtext=" in the URL
Philip
Leung wrote:
Is there no good way of differentiating search operations from others |
|
Re: Isolating search urls, posted by Philip Leung on Mon Aug 17 11:17:37 2015
|
This only applies to searches which specify that they are searching through the message text though. It would not work for things like quick filter
Stefan
Ritt wrote:
Look for "&subtext=" in the URL |
|
Re: Isolating search urls, posted by Stefan Ritt on Mon Aug 17 11:26:22 2015
|
For any other filter you need "&<attribute>=", which of course requires the knowlede of all attributes. There is no other "standard"
flag in the URL indicating a search.
Philip |
|
Re: Isolating search urls, posted by Philip Leung on Mon Aug 17 11:28:08 2015
|
Would there be a simple way to redirect all URLs BUT the ones which trigger searches?
Stefan
Ritt wrote:
For any other filter you need "&<attribute>=", which |
|
Re: Isolating search urls, posted by Stefan Ritt on Mon Aug 17 11:36:49 2015
|
No, no and again: no.
Philip
Leung wrote:
Would there be a simple way to redirect all URLs BUT the ones which |
|
Re: Isolating search urls, posted by Philip Leung on Mon Aug 17 11:52:54 2015
|
Noted. Thank you for your time
Stefan
Ritt wrote:
No, no and again: no. |