Additional Notes field under the recipe

[meersjo]

I would like to suggest an new freeform "Additional Notes" field under the recipe steps - optionally with markdown support as mentioned in #217 :-)

Some of the usecases I'm thinking of:

• Alternate ingredient possibilities
• Notes on how something turns out / may be improved
• Ideas for or notes on possible variations
• Clarifications on ingredients, portioning, ...

[uli-on]

This enhancement was why I came here 😏👍

[uli-on]

Currently I handle annotations with additional paragraphs inside the recipe text itself but by looking at the long string of indicator bullets it makes the recipes look overly complicated and creates confusion about where (how close to the end) in the cooking process I really am.

[flauschtrud]

@uli-on For the time being I would suggest to put annotations in the description field (with the additional benefit that it's searchable and you can use hashtags there). But I understand that notes are different from a description and there's value to have both.

@uli-on @meersjo Would you see value in the notes field being searchable (currently only the description, url and ingredients list are)? For example would you like to put tags with hashtags in a notes field? I personally would prefer the description field to do tagging, but I would like to get input from others.

[meersjo]

I think there would be some value; particularly when it's being used for ingredient variations; but for me that wouldn't be a major point - my personal usecase is mostly recipes I know well enough that I can find them with a simple title search.

Re: tagging, I think having multiple fields with tagging would needlessly complicate things, even if a particular tag might occasionally apply specifically to a variation. I'm very much in favour of the KISS principle :-)

[uli-on]

I've never tried putting something else into the description field other than a short/two liner description. But i see you've provided it with capacities for overflowing. I'd prefer a more natural order, though, ingredients first followed by recipe, variations & annotations thereafter.

If adding search capabilities is much effort I'd gladly accept a very basic version without search.

Currently I'd have no need for categories and tags, but that might come in handy one day ...

[flauschtrud]

If adding search capabilities is much effort I'd gladly accept a very basic version without search.

It's not necessarily a question of implementation effort but moreso of search performance. It wouldn't make sense to add data to the search index if people don't actually want to search in it (could even be confusing maybe), so this is why I ask.