Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

GoingElectric: Add option to combine the filters by network and payment method with an "AND" condition instead of "OR" #265

Open
johan12345 opened this issue Jan 20, 2023 · 3 comments

Comments

@johan12345
Copy link
Collaborator

As mentioned in #249 in discussion with @Ixam97, this can only be implemented as a local filter.

  • UI idea 1: Extra checkbox next to one of the filters to choose whether to use AND or OR
  • UI idea 2: Leave functionality of the current "Network" filter as-is (OR), and add a new filter "Exclude networks" which uses AND. Maybe "Network" should then be renamed to "Include networks". This seems kind of intuitive to me.

However, as a first step, I think we should implement #136 to make the current behavior clear to the user.

@NiyaShy
Copy link

NiyaShy commented Jan 2, 2025

I'm not entirely sure if I understand the proposed change correctly, so I can't say if what I noticed today aligns with it.
I tried setting up a filter profile that only shows chargers that belong to a specific network/operator (in my case "EWE/SWB"), but since I have to select at least one payment method/charging plan so any chargers get listed, I always get all chargers that are compatible with the charging plan and the selected network gets more or less ignored.

So, any option to enforce that the network selection is obeyed (or, to word it differently, that roaming partners are ignored) would be really helpful.

@johan12345
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@NiyaShy You can achieve this by simply not using the payment method filter (i.e., selecting all payment methods).

@NiyaShy
Copy link

NiyaShy commented Jan 2, 2025

Worked, thanks. Not very intuitive though, so I understand why you want to prioritize #136 😉
Sorry for "hijacking" the issue then, and thanks for your great work on the app.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants