You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
These minor features were lost when removing the Search section (#42):
Filtering for specific openEO API versions, down to the minor version number (i.e. for 0.4.2 instead of 0.4.x)
Searching within collection/process metadata
a. Searching within collection descriptions (only id and title searchable in filter feature)
b. Searching within process descriptions (only id and summary searchable in filter feature)
c. Regex support for searching within the fields (id, title/summary, description) of collections/processes
d. Sophisticated full-text search for all these fields (word-stemming etc.)
"Exclude processes that are deprecated" switch
Searching within processes' parameter names and descriptions
IMO:
1 was changed this way on purpose.
The things under 2 would be nice-to-have, but are not really necessary.
3 should be added again.
4 is obsolete (was never really needed anyway).
Any other opinions?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Agreed, re-implementing any of the options is not a priority at the moment and thus assigning it for 1.0. First thing to add again would be 3 and then 2. For 3 we would need to define the single source of truth (similar issues as for the titles/summaries).
These minor features were lost when removing the Search section (#42):
a. Searching within collection descriptions (only id and title searchable in filter feature)
b. Searching within process descriptions (only id and summary searchable in filter feature)
c. Regex support for searching within the fields (id, title/summary, description) of collections/processes
d. Sophisticated full-text search for all these fields (word-stemming etc.)
IMO:
1 was changed this way on purpose.
The things under 2 would be nice-to-have, but are not really necessary.
3 should be added again.
4 is obsolete (was never really needed anyway).
Any other opinions?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: