New L-number paging is tedious

[Deb]

I feel like that very annoying (Scottish) guest on Fawlty Towers who keeps saying he "doesn't wish to complain ... " and then proceeds to do so, but -

The L-numbers pages seem to be set up in a funny way. Before, you could zero in on your number, let's say L204, by using a dictionary-style breakdown to get into a range that includied your number, let's say L199+, and then it was a simple matter to refine the search to the exact L-number you wanted to find.

Now, the pages start off with L001 and go to L023. If you press 8 you get L001 - L023; if you press 16 you get L001 - L023; if you press 24 you get L001 - L023, and so on. I couldn't get off L023, until I pressed Next - but that's not very helpful, as it only takes you up in increments of 24. And if your number is L204, you can see the problem. Isn't there a faster way to do this?
What am I missing?
Why was the "old" way changed?
Of course, I'm joking about complaining. I only want to see PC running as smoothly as possible!
Deborah

[MatsP]

Hi Deb,

I agree, it needs to be fixed - or Jools needs to tell us both what we're missing.

And I think that Jools understands that neither of us are complaining for the sake of complaining... If I thought Jools would take it the wrong way, I wouldn't write half of the bug-reports I do write... But I know what it's like to develop things (software): You spend all the time fixing things that YOU see as wrong. But others will notice other things. On a good day, they'll tell you it's broken, on a bad day, they'll just give up and do it some other way, and think that the software is bad [which they probably do even if they do tell you - but at least then you can fix it for future users].

--
Mats

[Deb]

Exactly, Mats. I used to write on-line command lists which were essentaially datasets of user information for how to run this program or that program. I always got an operator to read it first, as a trial, and do the tasks before submitting the final version. I made sure I understood their preferred abbreviations, and their likely spelling errors, before submitting the final prompts. I know Jools needs us to do this. Thanks!
Deborah

[Jools]

Yes, it's crappie. I will try and improve it soon - just got a lot of balls in the air at the moment.

Jools

[Jools]

I know Jools needs us to do this.

Just in case there is any doubt, I totally agree.

Jools

[Shane]

Just to point out the best way to do it as I have heard this complaint already. If you want to compare several fishes per page, use the "View L Numbers" feature. If you already know what L Number you want to look up, go View Family-Loricariidae-species. View by L Numbers is great for comparisons, but you can just go directly to the sp via View Family if you know what you want to see.
-Shane

[Jools]

OK, 3 hours spent on a steep part of the learning curve and we've got some progress. It's hellishly buggy but 100% of the functionality is now back in place and I'm working on finessing the bugs and adding a couple of little cool tweaks.

Jools

[Deb]

Had a quick try, and all seems to be looking good!
I appreciate how much work it must be.
It will be so much more useful this way.
Deborah

[Jools]

Deb,

It's fun work and I love to learn.

All,

I think it's pretty much all there now with the inclusion of the new "big kahuna" option - you can get all l, c or lda numbers one page by clicking on the infinity symbol. This is nice because what you can do is click on the "show me only Peckoltia species with l-numbers" link and THEN click on infinity to get all l-numbered Peckoltia spp. on one page.

If anyone finds any bugs (there's bound to be something I've missed) let me know, otherwise this is going back on the shelf.

Jools

[Jools]

OK, job done, call closed, over and out etc...

Jools