So the change in Search and replace need to be reverted.

That should @ngraham decide. See also https://phabricator.kde.org/T10258#178907

I would badly suggest to use in both cases the same term, "Find" or "Search".

Should it be keep as shown above, I suggest to remove the unneeded space left from the input fields in power mode, so that it fit to the left edge and looks like the normal mode GUI.

"Find" and "search" are different things. Broadly:

• "Find" is limited to items in the current view only, and usually pertains to text.
• "Search" is anything broader than that.

So for this, "Find" is the appropriate term.

In D19771#431674, @ngraham wrote:

• "Find" is limited to items in the current view only, and usually pertains to text.

I prefer the term "Filter" for this. If there is no filter, you see everything, if there is a filter, you only see the items that match. No additional search is performed.

That's different. "Filter" actually hides non-matched entries. "Find" highlights them while keeping the context and surrounding content.

For me is your distinction between Find/Search not very intuitive. But OK, in terms of HIG may that somehow a wanted subtlety. Filter on the other hand is something else, yes, and here not fitting. So "Find..." in both cases.

Not answered are the questions about the removed label and if triple dots are bad, OK or in any case to substitute by true a ellipsis. Well, the latter I asked elsewhere T10258#178907.

All these Q/A should be added as examples to the HIG https://hig.kde.org/style/writing/placeholder.html

In D19771#431727, @loh.tar wrote:

For me is your distinction between Find/Search not very intuitive. But OK, in terms of HIG may that somehow a wanted subtlety. Filter on the other hand is something else, yes, and here not fitting. So "Find..." in both cases.

Not answered are the questions about the removed label

The idea is that we don't need a label if there's appropriate placeholder text.

and if triple dots are bad, OK or in any case to substitute by true a ellipsis. Well, the latter I asked elsewhere T10258#178907.

I'm not aware of why we tend to use three dots instead of the real ellipsis character. Possibly because that character can be challenging to type. Best to follow the existing convention, I think.

All these Q/A should be added as examples to the HIG https://hig.kde.org/style/writing/placeholder.html

Good idea. https://hig.kde.org/resources/contribute.html

:)

I'm not aware of why we tend to use three dots instead of the real ellipsis character. Possibly because that character can be challenging to type. Best to follow the existing convention, I think.

The advantage of using the unicode ellipsis character, is that this character carries a semantic meaning instead of just being a multiple of dots and uses a proper amount of space between the dot, also the hig use the unicode character. The only disadvantage is then used in monospace font.

Can you bring this up in the VDG channel? If we're going to use the correct character, we should do it everywhere.

In D19771#432157, @ngraham wrote:

In D19771#431727, @loh.tar wrote:

Not answered are the questions about the removed label

The idea is that we don't need a label if there's appropriate placeholder text.

Yes. But the mentioned HIG is slightly confusing and @ognarb will that revert again (bring back the label) here because of that. (at least I have read so)

All these Q/A should be added as examples to the HIG https://hig.kde.org/style/writing/placeholder.html

Good idea. https://hig.kde.org/resources/contribute.html

I think every mandatory standard should someone write who has the needed authority and responsibility and not some noob like me.

Regarding ellipsis, I'm not a fan of that special char, but that doesn't matter.

Hi, if we do that: Could we then remove the "Mode:", too and move that into the combobox?
Perhaps like "Plain text search", "Whole words search", ...
Otherwise the search&replace doesn't save space and it looks "strange".

Hi, any more feedback on this?

In D19771#440886, @cullmann wrote:

Hi, if we do that: Could we then remove the "Mode:", too and move that into the combobox?
Perhaps like "Plain text search", "Whole words search", ...
Otherwise the search&replace doesn't save space and it looks "strange".

Agreed, makes sense to me. @ognarb, can you look into doing this?

Hi, any more feedback on this?

When in power mode, and the fields are filled, it is not clear what which field is.

In D19771#468881, @loh.tar wrote:

Hi, any more feedback on this?

When in power mode, and the fields are filled, it is not clear what which field is.

I think this is a valid concern...

Hi, I try to find time to look into it this weekend ;).

Hmm, now that you mention it, I agree.

Maybe we can use placeholder text only for the quick find feature, but use labels for the advanced find-and-replace version?

I think then it is a bit inconsistent.
Would it really be that confusing, given until you write your find/replace stuff inside, you have the labels?