-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1k
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
empty list in facet value selector #1949
Comments
Thanks for the report. The reason for the change in v1.9 is that, when there are lots of facets/values (e.g. one of our own projects has hundreds), eager-loading them for the selector widget because a noticable drag on the UI, which is why we switched to lazy-loading based on filter term. But I can totally see why this could be a UX regression if the user doesn't have a clear idea of what to start typing. I'll have to think of how we can solve both issues at the same time. |
@simpian I'm experimenting with a way to handle this whilst keeping the performance gains of the lazy-loading. How about if the user presses the "down" arrow key to trigger loading all facet values? By the way, how many individual facet values do you have in your project? |
Could be resolved together with #2903 |
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Since version 1.9.0, facet value selector will return an empty list if no keyword is entered. This is not use friendly when we try to find and select a list of facets for products when we don't know the exact keyword to search, hence user needs to open the facet list page on a separate tab and use the keyword they see to search for the facet. Users are complaining this is not user-friendly.
Describe the solution you'd like
A clear and concise description of what you want to happen.
Can we please show the list of facets like we did before the changes from 1.9.0? Or we have a flag that returns this list when true.
Describe alternatives you've considered
A clear and concise description of any alternative solutions or features you've considered.
No other alternative right now, other than falling back to version 1.8.5
Additional context
Add any other context or screenshots about the feature request here.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: