A search field in Scriv. Preferences pane

Don’t know if this is even remotely feasible, but it would be a nice-to-have if there was a search feature that could look at the names of preference options in the main preferences pane, and highlight the matching sub-sections. Maybe even highlight the option(s) that matched once you’ve clicked on the section of your choice.

I’ve come to rely on the Help->Search field, as well as the search field in the Mac OS X System Preferences window. These features have freed up my brain for more creative purposes other than learning menu structures or prefpanes.

Yeah, I like that feature in OS X’s preferences, too. No idea how difficult it would be to make it though. One thing though, that’s what the little arrow buttons are for. Even I don’t remember where every single preference is, and when I’m in doubt, I just click through with the arrows until I see it.

It would be difficult. :slight_smile:

Well then, save it for when you’re bored. Right after the Make Coffee feature has been debugged.

Oh, and that one’s really buggy! (Not a single drop has come from my iMac up to now - go figure!)

I thought about that, and was wondering why something so clever (and so hot) couldn’t make my coffee. I decided it was because it didn’t have access to the raw ingredients - clearly my fault (it doesn’t have wheels yet). So I scooped on a couple of spoonfulls of coffee and poured in a cup of water and… :blush:

No, no, that won’t work. The knack is to connect the Mac not only to the internet, but as well to the waternet and to the coffeenet. (Blue and brown cables, unless you have the new Thunderbolt cables.) Plus it won’t work wireless for some strange reasons.

That’s mainly because coffee should be brewed at around 175º F, and to achieve these temperatures over wireless requires so much power to be pumped into the radio signal that it would cook everything meat-based in the house.

OK. That’s plausible. I prefer cables anyway; I have a bad karma with wireless gadgets. :wink:

Your suggestion is categorized in computation jargon as “raw search” or “traveling salesman problem” and is extremely inefficient. This is why Rdale suggested a search field as efficient alternative. Obviously the person making this suggestion has noodled around in Scrivener’s vast preferences tree and has found it hard to memorize and navigate. A search field would make things far easier and if properly implemented, would help both the user and the developers understand the organization tree by which preferences have been organized. The same code, once written, could be amortized across many aspects of the Scrivener application, allowing automatic org trees of function and content at many levels. If emplemented properly, such code could provide feedback that would help developers to optimize preferences organization to empirical cognitive responce of actual users.

Sure, sure.

Now about that wireless coffee maker.