Version Placeholder search logic

David Grundy
Posts: 241
Joined: 13 May 07 16:40
Location: Hong Kong

Version Placeholder search logic

Post by David Grundy » 14 Jul 13 10:22

Help! What's the logic of Version searches?
I am confused by the results of Version Placeholder searches in PSu. I can't find a way to explain it unless I assume that searching for "Version Sets" means different things depending what it's combined with.

Consider my database which has 1318 files which are Managed Versions in 634 sets. I have done some dynamic searches and I don't understand the logic which produces these results.

Search #1
AND:
. [Version Sets]

Result --> 634 Results

All Main Versions are shown.

Search #2
AND:
. [Album Display Version]

Result --> 634 Results

All Album Display Versions are shown.

Search #3
AND:
. [Version Sets]
. [Album Display Version]

Result --> 634 Results

All Album Display Versions are shown.
I thought previously Hert said there is no special functionality attached to Album Display version, so I would have expected the Main Version to be shown in the results.
So I interpret this results to mean the search works like this:
  • The first term finds all 1318 Managed Versions.
  • The second term finds the 634 Album Display Versions.
  • The Intersection of these two sets is exactly the Album Display Versions.
However this doesn't make sense because in Search #1 I only got 634 results, not 1318 results. So the first term does NOT find all Managed Versions. So I don't know what's going on here.

Search #4
OR:
. [Version Sets]
. [Album Display Version]

Result --> 1318 Results

All Managed Versions are shown in the results:
. 634 Main Verisons
. 634 Album Display Versions
. 50 others
I find this surprising. There are 634 results for each of these two terms. I expect to get either 634 results (if it shows one Version from each set) or 1264 results (if it shows all Main Versions and all Album Display Versions). Actually I got more than that. It appears that this search returns ALL MANAGED VERSIONS, even those which are not assigned either the Main Version or the Album Display Version.
This doesn't make sense to me. If the [Version Sets] search terms really refers to Version Sets not to individual files within those sets, then Search #1 for [Version Sets] should return every Managed Version - ie 1318 results not 634 results - the same as Search #4.
On the other hand if the [Version Sets] search term really refers to the Main Versions, then Search #4 should return the combination of the results from #1 and the results from #2 - ie 1264 results not 1318 results.

Search #5
AND:
. [Version Sets]
. Exclude [Album Display Version]

Result --> 684 Results

. 634 Main Versions
. 50 others
This seems consistent with the idea that [Version Sets] is a search for all files which are Managed Versions; but - as mentioned earlier - Search #1 shows that this is not the case.

So what is going on here??

Key question seems to be: When I search for "Version Sets" am I searching for Files or for Version Sets? Or ... am I completely misunderstanding the Version + Search logic?

Hert
Posts: 5873
Joined: 13 Sep 03 7:24

Re: Version Placeholder search logic

Post by Hert » 14 Jul 13 10:41

When you search for version sets then you get all files that have versions attached to them.

Keep in mind that a main version is not a placeholder. A main version is the file that has the versions attached to them and those attached versions can be assigned to a placeholder.

The results that you get all make sense to me. When you search for version sets AND album display, then that's what you get...all "files that have versions assigned" plus those versions in the version sets that ou have assigned to the album place holder
This is a User-to-User forum which means that users post questions here for other users.
Feature requests, change suggestions, or bugs can be logged in the ticketing system

David Grundy
Posts: 241
Joined: 13 May 07 16:40
Location: Hong Kong

Re: Version Placeholder search logic

Post by David Grundy » 14 Jul 13 11:33

Hi Hert

The current implementation seems to treat the search term "Version Set" sometimes as a reference to Main Versions only (eg Search #1) and sometimes as a reference to All files in the Version Sets (eg Search #3).

I would find it easier to understand as a user if there were two separate search terms available:
(1) Main Versions
(2) All Managed Versions (ie all Main Versions and other Managed Versions) --> This is what you describe the "Version Sets" search as doing, but it doesn't do that in Search #1.
Each of these search terms very intuitively and unambiguously describes a set of files. And the set of all All Managed Versions is the combination of the sets of all different types of Versions including Main Versions, which is very easy to understand.

The current "Versions Sets" search term seems to try to accomplish everything that can be accomplished by either of these, but they are not always the same and treating them as the same may make some more complicated searches impossible. For example (and of course the reason for this question arising) I can't easily find all Managed Versions which are neither the Main Version nor the Album Display version. If the two separate search terms were available it would be easy. And intuitive!

I recognise that from an implementation point of view the Main Version is different. It's the anchor point to which the others are attached, and I can see the GUID and the filename of the Main Versions appear in the xmp.ics for all other Versions. But from my point of view as a user, it's just "The First Version, ie the one 'Placeholder' that Always Exists in every Version Set".

... David

Hert
Posts: 5873
Joined: 13 Sep 03 7:24

Re: Version Placeholder search logic

Post by Hert » 14 Jul 13 12:07

The term "vsion sets" is used uniformly. See the last alinea in my previous reply. It explain the result in search 3...search 3 gives you all version sets (represented by main versions) AND the album versions. That is also what you searched for.
This is a User-to-User forum which means that users post questions here for other users.
Feature requests, change suggestions, or bugs can be logged in the ticketing system

David Grundy
Posts: 241
Joined: 13 May 07 16:40
Location: Hong Kong

Re: Version Placeholder search logic

Post by David Grundy » 14 Jul 13 12:12

Still, I don't see this as being consistent with Search #1.

And it breaks the logic of combining searches:
Criterion 1 -> 634 results
Criterion 2 -> 634 results
Search 4 == Criterion 1 OR Criterion 2 -> 1318 results, ie includes results that were not in Search 1 or Search 2.

I don't find this intuitive!

Hert
Posts: 5873
Joined: 13 Sep 03 7:24

Re: Version Placeholder search logic

Post by Hert » 14 Jul 13 12:20

There is no such thing (in search 4) as "managed versions without main versions". Like I said, all version sets have main versions. If you get 50 version sets that don't have main versions assigned that that' simply doesn't make sense. A main version represents a version set, so you could say that a main version is the same as a version set
This is a User-to-User forum which means that users post questions here for other users.
Feature requests, change suggestions, or bugs can be logged in the ticketing system

David Grundy
Posts: 241
Joined: 13 May 07 16:40
Location: Hong Kong

Re: Version Placeholder search logic

Post by David Grundy » 14 Jul 13 12:39

Hi Hert

My 50 versions that I referred to are those files which are Managed Versions but are not Album Display Versions and are not Main Versions. They don't have any placeholder assigned to them. Of course each has a Main Version with which it is associated.

I may have expressed myself badly. I didn't think anywhere that I was looking for "managed versions without main versions" as that indeed would not make sense. Could you explain why you think that's what I was looking for? I would like to avoid having the same misunderstanding in other related discussions.

Thanks
... David

tstoddard
Posts: 578
Joined: 07 Sep 12 12:51

Re: Version Placeholder search logic

Post by tstoddard » 14 Jul 13 14:30

The results of search #1 and #3 make perfect sense to me if the main version is the only file that has versions attached to it, but based on that logic, search #2 is flawed. If version sets are actually main versions (or files with versions attached to them) then search #2 should have no results since files can't be main versions and be assigned to a placeholder. Unless this assumption is wrong but I just test it and it appears to be correct, although the interface makes it difficult to determine. Based on the results of search #2, I would have to assume that the term "Version Sets" in the catalog view tree mean literally "Sets" not main versions. I don't know how else you can explain those results.

As an aside, my quick test points out how poorly the version set interface works. Here's what I did to test my assumption:

Selected a version set that had two versions, one main version and one cropped image that was assigned to no placeholder.
I assigned the cropped image to the album display placeholder.
I made the cropped image the main version.
I had to move from catalog view back to folder view and back to catalog view in order to be able to see both versions in the correct order.
Then, I couldn't see if the main version was assigned to a placeholder because when I point at the tab with the * nothing appears. Also, one of the images was now out of sync so I had to click on the little orange dot to get it to sync. The dot would not disappear until I switched back and forth between folder view and catalog view again.
In order to see if the main version is still assigned to the album placeholder I made the original image the main version again. Once again, I had to switch back and forth between folder and catalog view in order to make sure I was viewing everything correctly.
The cropped image was no longer assigned to a placeholder so I assume that it is automatically unassigned when it is promoted to main version.

I tried to repeat this to make sure I was describing it correctly and the next time I did it, the thumbnail I would see when I selected either one of the versions was that of the cropped image. I switched back and forth between views several time in order to try to fix it but couldn't. (Note, this didn't happen the first time I did my test.) Finally, I did a ctr+alt T to refresh the thumbnail and got the thumbnail of the original version back to full size.

This kind of thing is what drives me crazy when trying to use version management.
Tom Stoddard

David Grundy
Posts: 241
Joined: 13 May 07 16:40
Location: Hong Kong

Re: Version Placeholder search logic

Post by David Grundy » 14 Jul 13 15:30

Tom, the way Versions are implemented, anything which is a Main Version can not have a placeholder. As I understand Hert's logic, it's not actually a version, rather it's something different: it's the Base to which the Versions are attached. Since it's not a version, it can't have a placeholder. QED.

A lot of the difficulties you are describing are problems with poor refresh. Hert wants us to report every type of non-refresh as a bug via Mantis. (I see his point although it's frustrating in the meantime.)

They are a somewhat separate question from the underlying search logic, but they do have the effect of making it harder to see what's going on. I suspect this is why most people do not use Managed Versions. The logic is a bit hard to understand anyway, and problems with refresh mean they can't see what is happening. So they give up.

My hope is that we achieve a logic which people intuitively understand, and then problems with the interface will be recognised, reported and fixed. Then the functionality becomes compelling.

At the moment: the logic is hard to understand, and the interface problems make it even harder to get beyond the very basics.

tstoddard
Posts: 578
Joined: 07 Sep 12 12:51

Re: Version Placeholder search logic

Post by tstoddard » 14 Jul 13 16:33

David,

I do understand all of this. I'm sorry for the confusion my post may have caused. In the end, I am agreeing with your original post.
David Grundy wrote: If the [Version Sets] search terms really refers to Version Sets not to individual files within those sets, then Search #1 for [Version Sets] should return every Managed Version - ie 1318 results not 634 results - the same as Search #4.
On the other hand if the [Version Sets] search term really refers to the Main Versions, then Search #4 should return the combination of the results from #1 and the results from #2 - ie 1264 results not 1318 results.
Based on the results of Searches 2,3, and 4, Search #1 should return 1318. Hert's explanation:
IDimager wrote:When you search for version sets then you get all files that have versions attached to them.
explains search #1 but that's all. David, in your case this is harder to demonstrate because you apparently have an "album display for each version set". Let me substitute my numbers in your searches to make this clearer. In my case, many of my version sets have no placeholders assigned. I have 462 version sets which contain 950 files. Of the 950 files, only 167 are assigned to the album display placeholder, the others are not assigned to placeholders. When I repeat your exact searches, here are my results:

Search #1 (AND - Version Sets) - 462
Search #2 (AND - album display) - 167
Search #3 - (Version Sets AND album display) 167
Search #4 - (Version Sets OR album display) 950

I hope this helps to make your point.

If Hert's explanation is correct, then the results should be 462, 167, 0, 659.

As you've pointed out, if the result of Search #1 was 950 (all files in version sets) then all of this would make sense. It seems that Hert has made "Version Sets" represent two different things in two different contexts. When placed in the Dynamic Search panel by itself or when its in the label tree, it represents the number of version sets or the number of main versions (they are the same because all version sets must have a main version). When combined with other labels in the dynamic search panel, Version Sets suddenly represent all files within those sets. This is very strange and unintuitive behavior.
Tom Stoddard

David Grundy
Posts: 241
Joined: 13 May 07 16:40
Location: Hong Kong

Re: Version Placeholder search logic

Post by David Grundy » 14 Jul 13 17:28

How about this one, based on my tests just now.
The search term Version Sets has one meaning when you include it, and a different meaning when you exclude it.

Using an AND search - not that AND/OR should matter with a single search term (*):
. Search for (Version Sets) and the result is all Main Versions, but no other Managed Versions.
. Search for Excluding(Version Sets) and the result is all files except All Managed Versions.

That means that in the first expression, "Version Sets" means just Main Versions.
But in the second expression, magically "Version Sets" now means all Managed Versions (including Main Versions).

I think I'm quite good at understanding algorithms and program logic. But I do find this logic difficult. At present, I can't predict search results involving Managed Versions without actually trying it out to see what happens. And ... even the most expert participant on this forum seems to have guessed wrong earlier today about what would happen with a (easy to describe) search involving versions. I think that means the logic is not intuitive.
... David

Note (*) BTW: as it happens it DOES matter whether you use AND or OR when searching for the single search term Excluding(Version Sets). :shock:

Hert
Posts: 5873
Joined: 13 Sep 03 7:24

Re: Version Placeholder search logic

Post by Hert » 14 Jul 13 23:03

David Grundy wrote:That means that in the first expression, "Version Sets" means just Main Versions.
But in the second expression, magically "Version Sets" now means all Managed Versions (including Main Versions).
Version Sets are version sets, represented by a main version. If you want to see all version sets then you get to see all version sets. Nothing strange there.
In the second expression you request all images from the catalog, except the version sets. And that is what you get, all the images not part of a version set. Nothing strange there either.

Odd that you would find it intuitive that when you "query all images without version sets" you would want to have versions returned. Sorry, but that's doesn't make sense to me.

Hert
This is a User-to-User forum which means that users post questions here for other users.
Feature requests, change suggestions, or bugs can be logged in the ticketing system

David Grundy
Posts: 241
Joined: 13 May 07 16:40
Location: Hong Kong

Re: Version Placeholder search logic

Post by David Grundy » 16 Jul 13 17:26

Hert, I think we are coming at this from different perspectives.

You're saying, let's imagine a user who just wants a simple way to look at all the version sets, or just wants a simple way to look at everything that's not versioned. He doesn't want to think about "Main Versions" vs "All Managed Versions", he's just interested in images which have multiple versions vs images which don't.
OK, I can see your point. This user may be perfectly happy with just "Version Sets" as a search term.

But now another perspective: let's think about trying to do something more complex.

For example, in another thread I asked about how to find all Managed Versions which don't have placeholders assigned. I expected this to be easy: I would say (to PSu in Dynamic Search), "All Managed Versions, exclude Album Display, exclude Camera_Raw, exclude ... etc " so as to exclude all Versions which have a placeholder assigned to them.

My problem is, there's no search term that always means "All Managed Versions".

I can get the list of all managed versions - although it's a bit weird:
. excluding (group ( excluding (states (Version Sets))))
produces a list of all managed versions (not just Main Versions).
I say it's weird because in usual search logic {Not(Not(V))} = {V} but that usual logic doesn't apply here because V changes its meaning when you negate it.
(BTW Having thought about your previous posts, I predicted correctly that this would work. It feels weird, but it takes me a step towards what I'm looking for.)

Next, I need to exclude Album Display versions and Main Versions.

I can exclude Album Display versions from the list, by adding
. ( excluding (versioned (album display))
to the dynamic search.
(Even having thought about the previous posts, I wasn't sure whether this would work. As it happens, it does work.)

But then ... how do I exclude the Main Versions? If I try excluding "Version Sets" as well, it still shows me all the Main Versions as well as all the Versions with no placeholder assigned.
(BTW I didn't expect that. I expected to get zero results.)

So now I have a second problem: there's no search term that always means "All Main Versions".

So I'm stuck. I need a search term which always means "All Main Versions" and a search term which always means "All Managed Versions". Otherwise I can't construct compound searches reliably.

Could we compromise? Keep the search term "Version Sets" for those who just want a simple one-term-does-the-job approach.

For people like me - who want predictable results for compound queries - could we also have two more search terms?
(1) Main Versions
(2) All Managed Versions


I don't think these additional two search terms would confuse anybody. And nobody has to use them. But they would certainly make my life easier!

... David

Update: I have posted a feature request.
Please feel free to go there and put a +1 in the "Add Note" section at the bottom!

fbungarz
Posts: 1546
Joined: 08 Dec 06 5:03
Location: Arizona, USA

Re: Version Placeholder search logic

Post by fbungarz » 19 Jun 14 6:19

Hi David,
Interesting discussion.
Just as a quick comment: In IDI Pro finding images not assigned to plaeholdes (i.e., ones that are not part of a version set) is really quite simple. Put a red checkmark in front of Versioned Images (means "not versioned") and hit the green arrow. Odd that something so simple would not be as intuitive with a dynamic search in PSU.
Cheers,
Frank

Hert
Posts: 5873
Joined: 13 Sep 03 7:24

Re: Version Placeholder search logic

Post by Hert » 19 Jun 14 6:38

Frank,
Everything that you can do with the checkmark searching in IDimager you can also do with Dynamic searching in PSU. But with Dynamic searching you can do more.

In your example, setting the checkmark is the same as adding to dynamic search. Setting a red checkmark is the same as making the item red in PSU. Clicking the green run button in IDimager is the same as clicking the run button in PSU.
Search.jpg
Search.jpg (8.71 KiB) Viewed 3822 times
Back on topic. Searching for not versioned is not the same as searching for images without placeholder..
This is a User-to-User forum which means that users post questions here for other users.
Feature requests, change suggestions, or bugs can be logged in the ticketing system

Post Reply