Make verbatim search option more visible

maaca

Usually I know exactly which words I want to search for, but often I get search results that contain only a few of them, with no warning that some of the words are missing from the page.

To get the results I want, I have to open a few pages to find out it's not what I want, then go back to the search bar and change the query to "all" "these" "words" (alternatively +all +these +words).

It would be great if the recognition worked and warned me before accessing the page, or at least if there was a bang that could force the search (like !e all these words' which would do"all" "these" "words" or `!e +all +these +words' trick).

I like what Google does. If the word is missing on the page, it adds the information to the search results so the user doesn't have to go to the page to find it. It even sometimes adds the option to add "" to the word in the search bar with one click.

I understand that this feature can be complex to implement. A simple bang that does the trick and makes all words mandatory would save a lot of time.

z64

Hi maaca ,

We have the "Verbatim" filter that does effectively what you described with each individual term quoted.

We can certainly add a standard bang for this, that sounds like a good idea.

You can also create your own at any time. The appropriate template would be /search?q=%s&verbatim=1 in this case.

Note that this option is somewhat special, in that once you turn it on we remember it for future searches, until you explicitly turn it off again.

maaca

Hi z64 ,
Fantastic, I've overlooked the Verbatim option, it does exactly what I want.

Vlad

joonazan This is why there is Verbatim option. Problem is having it on by default would lead to suboptimal search experience. So we are looking for ways to better surface this in UI as it is a common question, and there is an option that works - users just do not know or expect us to have it I guess. Looking for further feedback around it.

CrunchyFritos

a standard bang for verbatim makes sense to me.

carl

Vlad You know what? These suggestions could be at the bottom of the first page, underneath the results. If you don't find what you're looking for on the first page, you probably want to refine the search.

leftium

Vlad

How about surfacing such features like verbatim in a left sidebar? If the sidebar is limited to only the top features you wish to surface, it would handle your previous objections (cluttered, won't fit on laptop screen)

Vlad

leftium That would be fine but our features are much longer than that

leftium

Vlad Yes, that's why I said "limited to only the top features you wish to surface"

Only the ones Kagi wishes to surface would be in the sidebar; it is not a replacement for the search tools menus, which would still exist at the top.

I would prefer having search tools in both the left sidebar and menus at the top because it still makes the search tools options easier to access and see.

Also I presented two ideas for reducing vertical space needed by Kagi's sidebar:

More/Less menu
Collapsible options

mhitza

Having used the verbatim option on and off since creating this topic, I have a few notes.

It's the behaviour I always want from a search engine. Match all of my terms across results.

However, verbatim, is too ... verbatim.
I make typos, and I want search engines to account for that, like the non verbatim option does. In all honesty, the only time I'd like true verbatim "character by character" match is when I paste an error message in my search, and that error message includes typos. Which could just as well be enabled by quotes around my query "phase search", instead of a configurable option (which also used to be how I'd query those in Google before it started getting too liberal with my search terms).

In summary I think that results should include all search terms in non verbatim mode.

And when it comes to signaling within the UI, alongside the "show more results" button, there could be an "switch to a less strict search for your query" / "try a more exploratory search" or something along those lines that switches on the (now) current search behaviour.

Vlad

We now show clearer marks when Verbatim is on.

However, verbatim, is too ... verbatim.

@mhitza that is literally what verbatim means .it is 1 or 0 either you want all your search terms verbatim or they are subject to search engine interpretation. It is very hard to do anything differently.

mhitza

Your argument makes sense, but I wasn't requesting verbatim search in my original post. I wanted to have all the search terms be part of my results. Verbatim was given as an option, and after using it for a while came back to leave my feedback on that approach. Which doesn't solve my problem in a general case.

Vlad

mhitza This is because 'general' case is differnet for everybody. Most people want the search engine to interpret more freely the query. For some that do not we introduced the verbatim option. It is not clear what else we can do?

mhitza

I can't pretend that I can understand people that want a search engine to omit terms they are searching for, though I have seen one or two such comments on past Kagi related submissions on HN. They are plain wrong! 😄

Of course, I have no insight into why more liberal interpretation of query terms involves removal of said terms. I could guess it has to do with how the search engines / indexes used behind the scenes behave and you might not have control over them.

In all it's faults, Google, which does this prominently, and which as far as I recall you use behind the scenes (along your other sources), at least highlights on the search result page for each result what terms are missing (crossed over words).

For me ideally the results should either

1) include all the search terms
2) highly boost those that contain all my search terms at the top (of course pinned/boosted domains can take precedence), and delineate those results that are missing some search them. Then I'd know where relevancy drops in the page.

In terms of what you can / should do, probably keep this issue somewhere on the back burner if neither of my suggestions are something that is technically simple or something that you'd like to implement. I've had these issues a couple of times from hundreds of searches, and probably will stay at the same ratio until your indexes grow substantially in size.

« Previous Page