Jump to Year/Decade when Sorting by Release Date

[rbjtech 5284]

1 hour ago, ebr said:

I don't think this request is the best way to solve that problem actually.  There is a request out here to show the field that the list is sorted by which would solve your actual issue there (you don't know what the sort value is for any particular item).

Hmm - partially yes, but even if that item was dynamically added/displayed just for the 'sort' - it still means you have to scroll though the list to manually find the start of what you are looking for.

If you are sorting a list which has common items or ranges, then the natural thing to do is to 'group' them in the list - provide an index - and then use the 'picker' to quickly get you where you want to be.

Think excel pivot tables.

It's a bit like sorting by Title without the alphabet picker - yes they are sorted, but if I have to manually scroll to 'X' then it defeats the object.

You can apply that same logic by listing Indexes for :-

• Critic Rating (Index of 1-10)
• IMDB rating (Index of 1-10)
• Parental rating (a bit more difficult, but for that user locale - list the normal ratings in order - PG, 15, 18 etc  )
• Resolution (SD, HD, FHD,UHD etc) 
• Year (Decades...)

I'm sure there are others.

FINDING what you want on Emby other than a direct Search is actually a long standing Emby weak point - Smart Playlists will help - but enhancing the basic 'Sort By' which produces 1000's of items with no discernible way to determine how they are sorted can be improved.     As can filters with the ability to AND/OR .. but that's another story.

 

Edited June 5, 2024 by rbjtech

[GrimReaper 4739]

3 minutes ago, rbjtech said:

As can filters with the ability to AND/OR ..

Oh, don't let me start on that one. 

[ebr 16169]

8 minutes ago, rbjtech said:

then the natural thing to do is to 'group' them in the list

I think some sort of grouping option would be a better approach than trying to create "picker" lists for all these different variations.  Think WMC pivots...

4 minutes ago, GrimReaper said:

Oh, don't let me start on that one. 

The problem with trying to implement any kind of AND/OR logic is that the number of people who will successfully construct the query they want will be far, far, far outnumbered by the people who twist themselves in knots trying to figure it out . 

[GrimReaper 4739]

8 minutes ago, ebr said:

The problem with trying to implement any kind of AND/OR logic is that the number of people who will successfully construct the query they want will be far, far, far outnumbered by the people who twist themselves in knots trying to figure it out . 

I know (we've had this same discussion in the past), but it still doesn't make my life any easier knowing that, missus ain't having sudden epiphany, she's still the same complaining hag just as she was at the time. 

 

Edited June 5, 2024 by GrimReaper

[rbjtech 5284]

1 minute ago, ebr said:

I think some sort of grouping option would be a better approach than trying to create "picker" lists for all these different variations.  Think WMC pivots..

Sure - some sort of 'combo' of a sort and a filter (for the same thing would work - I think)

[rbjtech 5284]

17 minutes ago, ebr said:

I think some sort of grouping option would be a better approach than trying to create "picker" lists for all these different variations.  Think WMC pivots...

The problem with trying to implement any kind of AND/OR logic is that the number of people who will successfully construct the query they want will be far, far, far outnumbered by the people who twist themselves in knots trying to figure it out . 

Then imho, the implementation of it needs reviewing. 

A common one asked for is Genre (even my eldest users have queries on why this can't it be done..)

I can pick Comedy - I get 441 items, I can pick Drama - I get 740 but if I want to filter by 'Comedy Drama' - I'm outa luck...   Which in 2024, is imo a little lacking.

But I promised I would not start this conversation on this thread - I'm blaming @GrimReaper.. 

Edited June 5, 2024 by rbjtech

[GrimReaper 4739]

48 minutes ago, rbjtech said:

I can pick Comedy - I get 441 items, I can pick Drama - I get 740 but if I want to filter by 'Comedy Drama' - I'm outa luck...

What do you mean "out of luck": don't you get "just" 1100+ "filtered" results, with the added bonus: lottery, randomly pick some items until you maybe stumble upon "Comedy Drama"...? Wouldn't you consider yourself lucky in case you did? 

[ebr 16169]

6 hours ago, rbjtech said:

A common one asked for is Genre (even my eldest users have queries on why this can't it be done..)

In that case something like a checkbox or radio option that switches between "require all" and "require any" (and maybe, "require none"...?) would be reasonable.

But trying to allow people to build "queries" with AND and OR would just be a disaster.

[arrbee99 1815]

I know I know nowt about it but could you maybe just limit this and or thing to just show 'x AND y' or show 'x OR y'. i.e. not 'x AND y AND q OR b OR g AND m'

[user24 313]

1 hour ago, ebr said:

something like a checkbox or radio option that switches between "require all" and "require any" (and maybe, "require none"...?) would be reasonable.

This is great suggestion! I have recently seen something similar implemented on a (somewhat dodgy) video streaming site:

The default selection case for each category is OR, and is applied across all categories such as Genre, Country, Year, Rating, Quality.

For categories that likely only have one possible selection criteria (Country, Year, Rating, Quality) there is no additional AND/OR check box or radio option.

For categories that may have more than one possible selection criteria (Genre) there is an additional AND checkbox:

Must have all selected Genres.

This implementation doesn't give multiple sophisticated AND/OR sections, you have one broad OR choice, or one narrow AND choice, where applicable.

However, it's very easy for anyone to understand and gives reasonable flexibility for everyone.

Edited June 5, 2024 by user24

[rbjtech 5284]

10 hours ago, ebr said:

In that case something like a checkbox or radio option that switches between "require all" and "require any" (and maybe, "require none"...?) would be reasonable.

But trying to allow people to build "queries" with AND and OR would just be a disaster.

Sure - more user friendly ways to term the same functionality is of course a good thing.