Closed Nysosis closed 1 year ago
Hi @Nysosis and thanks for creating this PR 👍
I think that we may have some code that relies on the field being the JSON structure opposed to a more friendly text as proposed by your PR. As such this is a breaking change.
I know Umbraco are doing doing similar for some of the build-in property editors, but I'm not always a fan of this either.
One approach could be to keep the existing field, but then also add the search friendly text as an additional field. Eg. if the field key is tableData
, a second field with the key tableData_search
is added with the search friendly.
Since we're using this package for many of our client projects, I need to have a chat with my colleagues on the best way to proceed.
Hi @Nysosis
The PR in general is fine, but like mentioned in my previous comment, we think the original JSON should remain in the index. I'll merge the PR, but I'm also looking into saving two different fields in the index.
Fixes #3 This will mean only the content of the cells is stored in the examine index and searchable