You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Hello - me again! This may be a stretch, or too complex to achieve. But I have a potential use case where it would be useful to only show items that have ALL of (or ONLY INCLUDES a subset of) the filter selections.
To make this concept a little bit clearer... you gave the red, blue and purple box example in the documentation, adding 'red' and 'blue' to the purple block.
By default purple will display if either 'red' OR 'blue' are selected.
With an AND rule, purple would only be shown if the 'red' AND 'blue' filters were selected.
To expand this further, consider the following items + tags:
Hello - me again! This may be a stretch, or too complex to achieve. But I have a potential use case where it would be useful to only show items that have ALL of (or ONLY INCLUDES a subset of) the filter selections.
To make this concept a little bit clearer... you gave the red, blue and purple box example in the documentation, adding 'red' and 'blue' to the purple block.
By default purple will display if either 'red' OR 'blue' are selected.
With an AND rule, purple would only be shown if the 'red' AND 'blue' filters were selected.
To expand this further, consider the following items + tags:
🔴 (1)
🔵 (2)
🟣 (1,2)
🟢 (1,2,3)
🟠 (1,2,3,4)
🟡 (1,2,3,4,5)
🟤 (2,3)
If I filtered by '1', the current rule-set would show all items except 🟤
With an AND rule, filtering by '1' would only show 🔴 - '2' would only show 🔵 - '1' AND '2' would only show 🟣 etc...
With an ONLY INCLUDES rule - if I filtered by '1,2,3' it would show: 🔴, 🔵, 🟣, 🟢, 🟤
🟠 and 🟡 would be excluded as '4' and '5' haven't been selected...
It may be stretching things a little far. But I would be curious to hear your thoughts :)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: