Learning CenterWhat is a mineral?The most common minerals on earthInformation for EducatorsMindat ArticlesThe ElementsThe Rock H. Currier Digital LibraryGeologic Time
搜索矿物的性质搜索矿物的化学Advanced Locality Search随意显示任何一 种矿物Random Locality使用minID搜索邻近产地Search Articles搜索词汇表更多搜索选项
╳Discussions
💬 Home🔎 Search📅 LatestGroups
EducationOpen discussion area.Fakes & FraudsOpen discussion area.Field CollectingOpen discussion area.FossilsOpen discussion area.Gems and GemologyOpen discussion area.GeneralOpen discussion area.How to ContributeOpen discussion area.Identity HelpOpen discussion area.Improving Mindat.orgOpen discussion area.LocalitiesOpen discussion area.Lost and Stolen SpecimensOpen discussion area.MarketplaceOpen discussion area.MeteoritesOpen discussion area.Mindat ProductsOpen discussion area.Mineral ExchangesOpen discussion area.Mineral PhotographyOpen discussion area.Mineral ShowsOpen discussion area.Mineralogical ClassificationOpen discussion area.Mineralogy CourseOpen discussion area.MineralsOpen discussion area.Minerals and MuseumsOpen discussion area.PhotosOpen discussion area.Techniques for CollectorsOpen discussion area.The Rock H. Currier Digital LibraryOpen discussion area.UV MineralsOpen discussion area.Recent Images in Discussions
Improving Mindat.orgProperty Search - Lustre checks are AND instead of OR
20th Mar 2015 00:28 UTCBruce Kelley Expert
For example, my search is as follows:
Colour: yellow
Lustre: Adamantine, Sub-Adamantine, Vitreous, Sub-Vitreous (It is sometimes hard to tell, so I try to hit all the possibilities)
Diapheny (I assume this is a misspelled Diaphaneity): Transparent, Translucent
Fracture: Irregular/Uneven
Crystal System: Isometric
All others left clear.
I expect for chlorargyrite and bromargyrite to be near the top of the list since they should match 100%, but I get no 100% matches at all and they are buried on the second page at 57%. The more Lustre boxes I check, the further down the list they fall. It is apparent that the Lustres are being treated individually as though they were separate properties in the query rather than combined into an OR clause. I have not tested it, but it is worth investigating if the other check box properties are treated the same way.
I think that treating these check boxes as an OR is more intuitive and probably what most users intend.
版权所有© mindat.org1993年至2024年,除了规定的地方。 Mindat.org全赖于全球数千个以上成员和支持者们的参与。
隐私政策 - 条款和条款细则 - 联络我们 - Report a bug/vulnerability Current server date and time: 2024.5.10 23:45:31
隐私政策 - 条款和条款细则 - 联络我们 - Report a bug/vulnerability Current server date and time: 2024.5.10 23:45:31