none
New Unread filter trap RRS feed

  • General discussion

  • Lord, I hate the Unread filter.  Can't use these forums without it.  New trap in this forum version: it is not uncommon to read through one page of threads with Unread turned on, move to the next page and have no more threads left.  Version 3 would show an empty page with the page navigator indicating page #2.  Version 4 shows "No threads found" without a navigator.  It looks like the forum has no unread threads at all.  It does, I didn't actually read all the threads on page #1.

    That is really confusing.
    Hans Passant.
    Thursday, April 2, 2009 2:05 AM

All replies

  • I agree wholeheartedly.  Not only that, but now my unread button is throwing a 500 error on the My Forums Threads page every time I click it.  I even tried clearing my entire cache, closing my browser, and trying again... no dice.  Very frustrating. 

    I have found at times, in the My Forums Threads page that the it seems iffy whether or not a thread will show up or not on the page.  I've noticed several times where the updates have stopped coming, but when I visit the actual forum page, There are posts I haven't read that are 20-25 minutes old.  Also, on top of that, whenever I reply to a thread, it's popping up in yellow at the top of the screen as an unread thread.  I'm guessing this is an oversight, but if the last person who posted to the thread was myself, I'd prefer that not to show up in the "unread threads" section.  

    Also, it'd be nice if the threads I've read using the drop down disappear after I read them.  This was a piece of functionality I really enjoyed in the last version, but it seems to have completely disappeared in this version. 

    It seems that there's still a bit of work to be done on the My Forum Threads page.  I'll save my additional suggestions until the base functionality is consistently working.
    David Morton - http://blog.davemorton.net/
    Thursday, April 2, 2009 2:23 PM
  • Hans, I think the appropriate behavior would be something like

    If(Page > 1 && Count == 0)
       RedirectBrowser(Page1)

    so if you tried to read/page through threads with unread on and by the nature they disappear from the list, it'll try to reset you to the first page?

    Other thoughts, the general behavior in 4.0 is new/updated things are added to the page and nothing is removed. In 3.0 the entire list was always wiped and recreated on each "auto update".  It could be that for the Unread case, the full refresh is more desirable, but that has it's own problems.

    Interested in hearing thoughts/opinions on its behavior.

    Also, re David's points I know there is some quirkiness once the filter is applied, once I get through a few more bugs I'm currently working on I'm going to try and drill in to this.


    Rob J, Forums Dev
    http://twitter.com/robjoh
    Thursday, April 2, 2009 4:39 PM
  • Ultimately, the nirvana here would be to give the user full control over the behavior.  I mean, there are other things I'd like to see, such as a "Mark All Read" for the Unread page.  If nothing else, a button like "Clear all read" would be nice.  Currently I have to either refresh the whole page or unclick and re-click the button to get this behavior.  I'm finding myself doing this alot. 

    All in all, I'm extremely happy with the My Forums Threads view.  I requested this quite a while back, and it's good to see that user opinions are being taken into consideration.

    I was finally able to get the unread view simply by adding the ?filter=unread to the URL. 
    David Morton - http://blog.davemorton.net/
    Thursday, April 2, 2009 4:49 PM
  • Hmya, watch out for that.  When I do that, threads gets filtered that have responses I haven't read yet.  Same as My Threads.  Not sure how wide-spread that is, I've only seen one other user complain about this (new to sql server).

    Anyhoo, back to my topic.  Ideal would be:

    void onNextPageRequest() {
      RenderPageStartingAt(lastVisibleThread + 1);
    }

    But I suppose that's difficult.  Your RedirectBrowser approach brings back threads that I've skipped in page #1, that's confuzzling too.  The V3 behavior, empty page, is perhaps the least undesirable.  Although we'd never get a consensus about that.

    Let's keep our eyes on the price, being able to navigate these forums without the Unread filter solves a lot these usability issues.  Having a very clear indication of "have read" status is the only way to get there.  Reviving the forums client project on Codeplex could help too.
    Hans Passant.
    Thursday, April 2, 2009 5:22 PM
  • Reviving the forums client project on Codeplex could help too.

    Yes!  After Manela got reassigned and taken off the project, the whole thing has fallen apart, and all there is on the site is a statement that one day, we might use NNTP, and another saying the client won't work any more.  I was planning on contributing code, but then all the other developers were removed, and of course, I can't define web services at Microsoft. 
    David Morton - http://blog.davemorton.net/
    Thursday, April 2, 2009 5:27 PM
  • Let's keep our eyes on the price, being able to navigate these forums without the Unread filter solves a lot these usability issues.  Having a very clear indication of "have read" status is the only way to get there. 
    Can you elaborate further on what you mean here? Right now we're using font styling to communicate the three possiblities.

    Bold - Unread
    Italic - Read but New
    "Regular" - Read.



    Rob J, Forums Dev
    http://twitter.com/robjoh
    Thursday, April 2, 2009 6:54 PM
  • I'm not so sure I can speak for everyone but my brain is wired to instantly filter out the differences between fonts.  So I can effortlessly read text in whatever typeface.  Sort of a survival edge in the modern world I'd guess.  That filter makes it impossible for me to see a clear distinction between normal, bold and italic text.  I have to look twice, flipping over a mental switch that looks at form rather than meaning.  Flipping that switch back and forth takes time and I can't do both.

    Since Forums 3, I have had to use the Unread filter to avoid spending any time on threads that I've already read.  It was never a problem at Forums 2, it used icons to indicate read status.  Dark gray was "boring, you've seen it", bright colors was "there's something interesting here".  There was never a learning curve either when I got started there, I instantly got used to it and picked out threads to read without effort.  Color works, fonts don't.


    Hans Passant.
    Thursday, April 2, 2009 7:49 PM
  • I agree with Hans, use colors.  It seems that there's a mix of styles in the form of colors/fonts in the new forums, and that mix of styles is rather confusing.  Definately do one or the other, but not both.  Preferably, colors are easier to handle.


    David Morton - http://blog.davemorton.net/
    Thursday, April 2, 2009 9:02 PM
  • Color works, fonts don't.


    Hans Passant.
    Unless you're color bind.

    David Wilkinson | Visual C++ MVP
    Thursday, April 2, 2009 9:24 PM
  • Color works, fonts don't.


    Hans Passant.
    Unless you're color bind.

    David Wilkinson | Visual C++ MVP

    Dang.  I never think of accessibility.  I apologize.  In that case, I suggest a color and an icon.  My two cents.  :)
    David Morton - http://blog.davemorton.net/
    Thursday, April 2, 2009 9:36 PM
  • Dark and bright colors.  Color blindness doesn't affect perception of luminosity.  Let's keep our eyes on the ball folks.
    Hans Passant.
    Thursday, April 2, 2009 11:16 PM
  • Or change the geometrical shapes. Or have a letter in the circle. Or have a shape in the circle. Or have a letter in the shape in the circle. :)
    Wednesday, May 20, 2009 11:11 AM