Sorry, been a member for two years but only really started using this site in the past two weeks heavily. I tried looking around to see if this suggestion had already been made but I don't see it. (I can't quite believe though it hasn't.)

One suggestion I have is pretty simple. If I do the "search" in the "Your books" tab and I don't get a result, it should also do a "add books" type dialog or at least offer me a link to take me to the add books with the same search.

Maybe it's there now and I just don't see it.

I know I can just click the "Add boks" tab, but it seems like such an unnecessary step.

I don't think that the next step after a null search would usually be a desire to add a book.

I always have the desire to add books ;-) But other than that...

I agree with suitable1. If I do a failed search, it means I don't, in fact, have the book, so why would I want to add it, other than possibly to my wishlist?

Really? The situation I've ended up getting into is not being sure if I added a book to my library already. So either I search "Your books" and get a null search or I just try to add the book and get a warning message. In either way there's an extra step. (Either I need to click another tab or I need to delete something that I just entered.) It's rare that I don't remember owning a book. I've started keeping track of what I read in part due to series I'll read and occasionally I might not remember what book I was on in the series. (I should note my library is much bigger than shown here, most of my books are in storage at the moment and I'm slowly adding the ones that aren't.)

What other reason do people search their books? (I'm fairly new, keep in mind.) I suppose I could see for those cases to see whether they had read it not already or have purchased it. But then just getting the null is answer enough and it shouldn't be really annoying that there's something to the right.

In many ways, I kind of wish there was just a search to find books, regardless of whether or not they're in my collection. Then either a note that I already own the book or an option to add to my collection. After all, when I'm looking for reviews, talk, or similar with a book I normally don't care whether or not I own it already.

You can search all of LT by using the search tab, It's the third from the right on the tab row.

ah, I knew that at some point. Still, wish that tab was the second one from the left.

Still, it seems to make sense to me to have something appear after a null search along the lines of "Did you mean to add this book"? Cause I know I'm likely to be hitting that via the search on the home page.

(Hmmmm, maybe that needs to be another suggestion/request. Replace/change the default so I can search all books from that box on the home page. Less clicking = happier jtgorman.)

I'm with you on this. A lot of people seem uncomprehending of why anyone would categorize books they don't own, but I do not have physical space for more than the about 500 books I own, and as such as I use the library heavily, I read a lot of books I don't own, I have a lengthy list of books I want to read but don't own--and I use LT to keep track of all of that. So I use LT differently than people who only categorize their physical library. If I'm searching my library for a book, it's probably because I don't own it but I've either read it or want to read it and can't remember if it's in my library--so if I get a null result, the first thing I do is go click my way to another page to add it. Not everyone uses LT the apparently-canonical way.

What other reason do people search their books?

1. To limit them -- as in looking for books with a particular tag, or by a particular author, or to see what books I have with a particular word in the title.

2. To do some work on them -- change the collection(s) they're in, change tags, rate, add a review, make sure all the classification and publication data is correct, etc.

I don't think I've ever done a search with a book I know I own to determine whether or not I need to add it. But then, I've been here since the trilobites swam the seas, and all my books are long since entered -- I add books when I buy them, but the initial rush of "adding all my books" is long over. I suspect you'll find that once you're through that stage, you'll also find yourself less frequently wondering "Have I added this book yet?"

>9 But not everyone is only adding books they own or only adding books as they buy them. I've added all the books I own and when I buy books I add them. That's easy. I still frequently search for books I do not own because I can't remember if I've added them yet (books I read years ago or intend to read years from now), and this isn't a "stage"--it's just the way I use this site. It's great that it's so seamless the canonical way, but a well-designed site should accommodate people who use it in a variety of still-completely-reasonable ways. As it is, I certainly can do most of what I want, but a lot of it is cumbersome and takes too many clicks and too many page loads because the whole layout of the site seems to be based on one way of using it.

10>

You realize that by doing a site-wide search you can find the book and determine easily from the work page whether you have it, and add it if you don't, right? It seems like your use-case would be better suited to doing a site search and seeing whether you have it, rather than asking everyone who uses the site differently to need to jump through extra hoops every time they do a search and don't want to add the book.

Also, I wasn't talking about people who use the site as you do -- the OP specifically mentioned being new, and I was specifically talking to him.

I agree with
--Still, it seems to make sense to me to have something appear after a null search along the lines of "Did you mean to add this book"?--

All I'm thinking of is a link to the add books page on the null results page. Of course, I also think that the "did you mean to search in all collections?" option should be more prominent if you get 0 results when searching in 1 collection.

Message edited by its author, Nov 6, 2009, 7:16pm.

In response to 8, I think that using the library frequently is also a huge part of it. Lorax, I read far more books than I own. I also occasionally buy books I already read. It might be that I'll eventually add enough of my collection that it's less bothersome, but I don't see that happening for a while yet.

I think the point that there's several ways folks are using LT (I use it for to keep track of what I've read, what I own, and to look for new and possibly exciting books.)

I do do a site search (which I have to load extra pages to get to). It would just be smoother the way I use it if I could search my library, then click add.

"rather than asking everyone who uses the site differently to need to jump through extra hoops every time they do a search and don't want to add the book."

Huh? What on earth hoop do you have to jump through? Don't click the "did you want to add the book" link. Not clicking isn't really a hoop.

14>

Depends on the implementation, I suppose. A discreet link that doesn't get in the way of what's already there or draw attention to itself, not a problem. Rerouting me to the Add Books page, or popping up a new window with the link, is a hoop.

Look, one way is smoother for you and people who use LT like you do, one way is smoother for me and people who use LT like I do. We're never going to convince each other by saying "but doing it like X is smoother!"

Message edited by its author, Nov 6, 2009, 7:47pm.

No one was asking for a reroute or a new window, just a link. (And we're only even talking about a search that returns a null result. Presumably, the way you use the library search, if you get a null result you aren't doing anything following from that result anyway.) That would make it smoother the way I use it and no less smooth the way you use it. It's not necessarily a zero-sum game. I'm asking to jump through fewer hoops--that doesn't add hoops to you.

This isn't the first time I've seen (or posted) a reasonable and fairly minor suggestion, where the predominant response was basically "Who on earth would even want to do that? Ur doin it rong." Well, obviously someone (or I) would want to do that, hence the suggestion. If you wouldn't like it, fine, carry on. I just don't understand the incomprehension that it would be useful to others because others use the site differently.

Message edited by its author, Nov 6, 2009, 7:56pm.

I do do a site search (which I have to load extra pages to get to).

There have been suggestions in the past to add a site search to the top bar, but ease of navigation isn't always a priority here.

That is the first time I have ever seen the phrase "Ur doin it rong" on this site.

It is sad, MerryMary, that that sort of thing seems to come up rather often and for its incomprehension might as well be spelled that way.

Robert

Most of my null results are because of a typo or bad spelling. I would want to be asked "did you mean ...." (like Google), rather than "do you wish to add this book."

No one was asking for a reroute or a new window, just a link.

If it's only a link, how is that different from just clicking the Add Books tab?

If you want it to be a link that will do the Add Books search for you, then I really don't see this as super helpful. Do you use the same search terms in your library that you would use in the Add Books dialogue? The syntax is not even the same for the two searches.

suitable1 -> well, there's 80% whitespace on a null search. I think there's room for two links ;).

nperrin -> That tab is a lot "farther" away and I have to remember it's there. It's not in the same working space. It's also means I need to use the mouse instead of just hitting tab, which I would be able to do if the link was nearby the default focus of the page.

I guess I don't know what else to say. I think the "null search" on "Your books" could have more options right where you're interacting rather than just hitting the x to be thrown into the Your Books page. (Seems to do this even if you start at home.)

It feels different to me. If it doesn't to you, that's probably why you haven't posted it as a recommendation/suggestion before ;).

20: A "did you mean" search would be awesome, but far trickier for LT to do than Google. Twould also take more dev time than the add books link. :/

nperrin makes a really good point in #21 about the syntax. Do you (speaking generically to the people who want this) really do full-title searches in your library rather than searching for a couple keywords? If you do, this would work well, but if you just type, for instance "Deathly Hallows" to see if you've entered the last Harry Potter book, you'd have to adjust the search anyway.

No one was asking for a reroute or a new window, just a link.

No one except the OP, that is:

If I do the "search" in the "Your books" tab and I don't get a result, it should also do a "add books" type dialog

Admittedly, he then said that a link would be a second-best alternative, but you can't say nobody asked for anything other than a link.

Presumably, the way you use the library search, if you get a null result you aren't doing anything following from that result anyway.

I was responding to a specific question, that expressed bafflement at anyone doing a search for any reason other than to answer the "is this book in my catalog" question. As I and others have said, if we get a null result, it's probably a typo, and we don't want to be told that what we obviously really wanted to do was add the typo-book.

if you just type, for instance "Deathly Hallows" to see if you've entered the last Harry Potter book, you'd have to adjust the search anyway.

Typing just "Deathly Hallows" in the add books screen works fine.

The usual reason I would search for a book in my catalog would be to use my location tag system to find the physical book.

I both own a lot of books and read a lot of books from the library. But with my memory, I don't even try to enter books that I read once-upon-a-time, and I enter my library books when I bring them home from the library. So I fall on the side of searching to determine if I own a book (so I can read it if I have it or get it from the library or buy it if I don't) rather than to determine if I've entered it yet.

The OP's request is quite reasonable on its own. The problem is that there are lots of possibilities for what someone might want after a null search (two so far...), and if one desire is granted you either get a lot of whining 'why can't I have what _I_ wanted, he got his wish...' or an extremely cluttered page that is much harder to find anything on than the nice clean tab line. In my opinion, modified by reading a lot of responses from Tim & Co about various ponies. (I have ponies too, and ask about them from time to time. Everyone does. Just don't ride them into the ground...how's that for an unmixed mixed metaphor?)

To clarify my original post I did not ask for a new window or automatic redirect. Let me try to clarify what I meant for about a dialog. Just a paragraph or two that might show the top three books that would have matched the search with a "search more" that would take you to the add search tab with the search used in "Your Library".

An example of something similar, it could look like the current "Touchstones:" dialog that appears to the right of these post messages. It could take you to take different actions that might be the common reactions to a null search. (The two that seem to make sense are typos in the current search or a book you thought was in the collection actually isn't). The x I would imagine isn't exactly intuitive for a lot of folks either.

I wasn't baffled but I was asking for other common approaches to see how different folks approached it. I was essentially trying to see if there was any reason for the minimal page at a null search. I still don't really understand how the the page that returns in the situations you describe is useful for those situations or how adding such a dialog or set of links would be such a great hindrance.

Maybe to clarify, what are the situations you're searching your collections and get that page and your next step isn't to revise the search or add the book? You still have to hit the x or hit the back button if you want to revise the search, correct? The null set page is 80% whitespace from what I can see now. What about how it is currently set up makes it better for your purposes?

_Zoe_, the problem with starting in the Add Books screen is that the add book doesn't indicate whether or not you already have added it to your collection or not till after you added it. Then if you don't want a duplicate record you have to remove it.

At some point I'll flesh out some more details perhaps on what some of the issues are, although I'm a bit busy at this point.

I don't see the worry about cluttering up a page that's so empty. You could easily add three or four more things to do and not even have it take up 50% of the screen real estate on my browser. In fact, given the rather cluttered interface elsewhere on the site it doesn't seem that there's been a lot of concern about showing too much information ;).

_Zoe_, the problem with starting in the Add Books screen is....

I wasn't suggesting that you start in the Add Books screen, only responding to lorax's claim that going from null search results to add books wouldn't work because the add book page requires full titles. It doesn't.

_Zoe_ : ah, gotcha.

29: You still have to hit the x or hit the back button if you want to revise the search, correct?

No, you can just type something new in the search field.

30: No one said the Add Books page requires full titles, just that the syntax and search behavior are different. If I were looking for the last HP book in my library, I would probably only type "deathly" or only "hallows" -- that's all I would need. Or I would even type "Rowling" because I would find it on the top of the screen anyhow. Now, none of these would work very well, especially if you're trying to find the right edition, but it's worse than that really, since you need to separate fields with commas in the Add Books search, something that you don't do at all in the catalogue search. The point is, the search behavior is different (though it wouldn't surprise me if for some folks it was the same, of course).

32: No, you can just type something new in the search field.

Ah, well I guess. But I still have to completely retype the search, even if it is a typo, right?

So if I type Draggons of Twilight, I have to retype Dragons of Twilight after selecting the search button. I suppose I just need to not make mistakes or not be annoyed by having to do a lot of extra clicking ;).

>32 No one said the Add Books page requires full titles

Then what was the point here? Do you (speaking generically to the people who want this) really do full-title searches in your library rather than searching for a couple keywords? If you do, this would work well, but if you just type, for instance "Deathly Hallows" to see if you've entered the last Harry Potter book, you'd have to adjust the search anyway.

You say almost the same thing: If I were looking for the last HP book in my library, I would probably only type "deathly" or only "hallows" -- that's all I would need.

And my point still stands. Try these searches on the Add Books page with the default (Amazon, unfortunately) source. If you search just "Deathly" or just "Hallows", Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows is the first result. If you search just Rowling, the results obviously aren't as limited, but Deathly Hallows is still there on the first page.

33 JonathanGorman

In both the Add Books search and when searching Your Library, the search terms remain in the search box on the new page. So no, you don't have to retype the search if you make a typo, you just have to click in the search box and edit what's already there.

34: The point is that this is only the case for some books. Say I want to know whether I have The Garden of Eden. I would just type "eden," because I know I don't have any (or at least, many) other books where that would come up. But that's not going to do me a bit of good in an Add Books search.

Further, the way I would search in Add Books, if I weren't going to use an ISBN, wouldn't even be possible to put in the your catalogue search field: "hemingway, eden, scribner" (note that searching on "garden of eden" won't get you anywhere you want to go in an LOC search).

Obviously weak search terms can be used to find anything from a weak source eventually, but it seems like some pretty poor design to use terms from a field with one type of syntax to a field with a different type of syntax entirely.

>36
Further, the way I would search in Add Books, if I weren't going to use an ISBN, wouldn't even be possible to put in the your catalogue search field: "hemingway, eden, scribner"

This is not the case. Try it out in either an "all fields" or "most fields" search. If the feature were implemented you could develop a habit of using searches that would work in either the catalog or add books. But of course it is true that many searches that would work in the catalog would not work in add books.

I'm on the fence on this one. I don't think I would use the feature much but I do think it has merit and the null search page isn't doing anything now. One possible problem is that automated features tend to give the impression that they should always work. And that would not be true in this case. New users would potentially have the most to gain from this feature, but they might also find it the most confusing if they are frequently offered the option of adding books they were not even searching for.

>36 Well, it depends what you mean by "a bit of good". With Amazon, Eden will bring up the book you want on the second page of results.

I don't think the real issue here is whether the feature could work (it could), but how desirable certain data sources are. Amazon has a great search engine and lower-quality data; libraries have finicky search engines but higher-quality data.

People who are using LT to record books they've read rather than books they own (i.e., those who are more likely to want and use this feature) don't always need perfect edition data, so Amazon is probably going to be good enough for them--both JonathanGorman and katieinseattle have entered the vast majority of their books from Amazon.

Further, the way I would search in Add Books, if I weren't going to use an ISBN, wouldn't even be possible to put in the your catalogue search field

This doesn't really matter, since we're going from catalogue to Add Books rather than the other way around.

Obviously weak search terms can be used to find anything from a weak source eventually

There's not actually any connection between the fact that Amazon can find books with weak search terms and the fact that Amazon is a "weak source". Amazon can find books with weak search terms because it has a strong search engine. "Eventually" sort of misses the point.

Message edited by its author, Nov 8, 2009, 11:10pm.