Eliminate "Name" Column heading from Result List?

[ChrisGreaves]

I have read through some (but not all) topics on "Result List including "suggestions and questions about ui/result list. If I have missed this topic, please accept my apologies.

The user can right-click on column headings and remove all but "Name".
Why this restriction?
I suspect because "We've always done it that way!"

If I am short of screen space, I might want to NOT see the name of the objects but use the screen to show Length, Size, Type, Date Modified and a slew of valuable numeric data which I will capture in a CSV file and use for analysis.

A cheap example is Windows File Explorer where we select the contents of a folder then right-click, Properties, and receive a panel with the number of files, number of folders, number of bytes. We have no need of individual names of objects when performing numeric analysis.

Let me pre-empt the argument that I can always delete the Name column once I am in the spreadsheet by maintaining that here I'm talking about decision-making while the user builds the screen representation of data.

I can understand that there may be an historic facet of the way Everything is coded such that there must always be at least ONE column heading, but if so, why not accept one of the headings requested by the user (Length, Size, Type, Date Modified etc) and then retire "Name" as the user requests?

Why should Everything care that the user feels they do not need/want "Name" as a column heading?

I base my suggestion on the number of times I have found that reducing rules or constraints on a user application always simplifies coding rather than complicating it.

This is not an urgent request, but something to discuss as a low-priority, perhaps visit it in earnest the next time a major revamp of the Result List takes place.

I have a sneaking suspicion that a Result List without any column headings should produce the same numeric summary that it does when presented with an empty search box.

I'm just sayin' ...
Cheers, Chris

[therube]

Unremovable Name column

[ChrisGreaves]

Unremovable Name column

Thanks TheRube. I didn't see this (possibly because I tend to search only the Everything 1.5a forum, or only posts current over the past two years), but I have now read it.
Void responded "The Name column is not removable." which I had worked out.
For me the main question is one of:-
"Why can't the Name column be removed?"
"Why can't a different column be substituted for the name column?"

I vaguely understand that Everything focuses on using "Name" as a primary access point into searching, and I can accept that Everything program code has a historic dependence on "Name", and even that 99.99% of users want to see name, but in the linked post Mizufluffy is arguing that she doesn't need "Name" in the Result pane, and I would try to separate "what we see in the result pane" from "How we obtain the data that populates a result list"

This is not a huge issue, and I would be stepping over the line to suggest a rewrite of Everything, but there are logical reasons for not wanting to see "Name" in a result list. The economic argument is, frankly, miserable

Cheers, and thanks again for the link
Chris

[horst.epp]

Sorry but I can't see any usefull result if I don't know what the name of the file system object is.
Any search and any sort for some properties or columns is useless without knowing what it is.
Do you have any meaningfull example what job you would accomplish without it ?

[ChrisGreaves]

Sorry but I can't see any usefull result if I don't know what the name of the file system object is.
Any search and any sort for some properties or columns is useless without knowing what it is.
Do you have any meaningfull example what job you would accomplish without it ?

A cheap example is Windows File Explorer where we select the contents of a folder then right-click, Properties, and receive a panel with the number of files, number of folders, number of bytes. We have no need of individual names of objects when performing numeric analysis."

When we seek statistical data, we may not need details such as "name" at all.
Think of how often you read statistical reports in a newspaper:-
"0.0286% of people now living in Bonavista were raised in Western Australia"
"0.0286% of people now living in Bonavista take an active part in the voidtools forums"
"0.0286% of people now living in Bonavista raise over one thousand apple trees seedlings each year"

We can gain knowledge from a numeric sample of a population of objects without being able to identify (and hence locate) a single one of those objects.

If you have MP3 music tracks on your system, you could use Everything (I think; I'm still new at all this) to tally up the total duration (play time) and announce that you now had just over 24 weeks of continuous play (24 hours per day) music at hand. No names, no paths. Just numeric data.

Untitled4.png (75.82 KiB) Viewed 1468 times

Here is a PrtScr capture from SpaceSniffer, which I took yesterday for a different forum. It shows how I have arrived at a situation where my computer has become an entertainment centre, for all my claims that I am really a computer programmer!
Again, no names. Paths, yes, but only in the broad sense.

Cheers, Chris

[meteorquake]

I can see your argument.
I presume it's to guard users for their own benefit from accidentally removing it. It's pretty rare for its presence to be a problem.
If so, perhaps it could ask "Are you sure?" on its removal, or there could be a setting that allows it (perhaps a single general setting that removes all inessential constraints would be simpler than a special setting).
David

[ChrisGreaves]

I can see your argument.
I presume it's to guard users for their own benefit from accidentally removing it. It's pretty rare for its presence to be a problem.
If so, perhaps it could ask "Are you sure?" on its removal, or there could be a setting that allows it (perhaps a single general setting that removes all inessential constraints would be simpler than a special setting).

Thanks David; I am going to say that I can see no reason for it needing to be there, but it was thought to be a good idea at the time.
In any sort of User documentation, explaining how to remove columns from a list but not this one column will prompt questions "Why Not?", so i am anticipating the question and providing the best answer that I can.

I've given this some thought, and can find no logical reason for singling out "name" in the Result List.

Years ago on a KWIC indexer, I came to the conclusion that fewer rules meant less code, and less code meant less coding errors. And, of course, less for the end-user to learn. A smaller User Guide.

Cheers, Chris

[ChrisGreaves]

The user can right-click on column headings and remove all but "Name".
Why this restriction?

... although as the days go by I am likely to see cases where 'name" seems to be an assumed environment for some facilities.
Example: From the Edit menu Find highlights sub-strings within - names!

MenuSystem_14.png (75.18 KiB) Viewed 1312 times

I suppose that "Edit Find" would find itself sort of homeless if the name column were to be removed.
Chris