Some feedback on Search Results Page

[David Alayachew]

Thanks Hannes.

I understand your logic now about the blue. And yes, there are clear
directions on the top. While I might still prefer the blue, that's a mild
preference now, after having read your response.

I also understand your logic about the 2 columns, but that sounds more like
an argument for saying that the 2 displays should be in sync -- not that
there shouldn't be a different ordering or compartmentalization of the
content. Me personally, I find it easier to parse the contents of a table
when each column has a single piece of data. So, I remain unconvinced on
this point.

But like you said, let's see if others feel similarly.

Thank you for your consideration.
David Alayachew


On Tue, Sep 2, 2025, 6:59 AM Hannes Wallnoefer <hannes.wallnoefer at oracle.com>
wrote:

> Thanks for the feedback, David.
>
> The main objective for the updated search page in JDK 25 was to make it
> possible to navigate search results by keyboard (using tab, arrow and
> return keys). That’s also the reason search results are no longer displayed
> as blue links. Now the whole result row is the link, which allows you to
> click anywhere in the row (it still works with right-click and open in new
> tab).
>
> The reorganisation of table columns and content is due to alignment with
> the navigation bar search field on other pages, which now uses the same
> two-column format. It used to use a single column format containing only
> the fully qualified name.
>
> As you say, it’s all about tradeoffs. A fully qualified name (or something
> resembling it) may be quicker to read. The new layout provides more
> information, and IMO it’s also  more aesthetically pleasing, although
> that’s certainly subjective. I’m open to changes if there’s a clear trend
> in feedback.
>
> Hannes
>
> On 01.09.2025, at 19:35, David Alayachew <davidalayachew at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> May also want a 4th column for module, but that's less important. Maybe
> makes sense to put that behind a toggle.
>
> And I want to emphasize, of these suggestions, the splitting up of
> Description is the most important. That just makes my searching experience
> more taxing, as the horizontal position of a package name is slightly
> different for each line, making reading harder.
>
> On Mon, Sep 1, 2025 at 1:24 PM David Alayachew <davidalayachew at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hello @javadoc-dev at openjdk.org <javadoc-dev at openjdk.org>,
>>
>> If I click "Search" on the top left of Java 24 Javadoc, and then when the
>> page loads, I type in "Subtask", it returns "StructuredTaskScope.Subtask"
>> with blue text. Here is a screenshot.
>>
>> <image.png>
>>
>> But if I do the same for Java 25 EA, not only is the columns different,
>> but the text color for the Class Name has changed from Blue to Black. Here
>> is a screenshot.
>>
>>
>> <image.png>
>>
>> It is also the same for Java 26 EA. Here is a screenshot.
>>
>> <image.png>
>>
>> There's definitely some tradeoffs I can see.
>>
>> For example, I can now see from a glance if it's an interface, a class,
>> an enum, etc.
>>
>> But on the other hand, the "Description" column smushes 2 separate pieces
>> of data together -- class type and package. I would much prefer that these
>> be 2 separate columns, for a total of 3.
>>
>> I also would like it if we could go back to having packages on the left,
>> vs the right. I understand that the class name is what people care about,
>> but since fully qualified names of classes start with packages, then I
>> think it also makes sense to have the packages be the first column. We can
>> keep class type (interface, enum, Exception, etc) as the 3rd column.
>>
>> Finally, can we go back to the blue text? Blue is a nice signifier -- I
>> see blue, and I think hyperlinks. It kind of leads me into right-clicking
>> to open in a new tab, and since the blue pops out compared to the black, my
>> eyes naturally gravitate towards it, making it easier for me to find what I
>> need.
>>
>> These are just a few suggestions from trying out the Java 25 Javadoc over
>> a period of time. I like it, but think it can be better.
>>
>> Thank you for your time and help.
>> David Alayachew
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/javadoc-dev/attachments/20250902/6818b6db/attachment-0001.htm>