Outline limitations of special character use in search within the Global Search documentation

This page may contain information related to upcoming products, features and functionality. It is important to note that the information presented is for informational purposes only, so please do not rely on the information for purchasing or planning purposes. Just like with all projects, the items mentioned on the page are subject to change or delay, and the development, release, and timing of any products, features, or functionality remain at the sole discretion of GitLab Inc.

Problem to solve

Advanced search does not support a variety of special character usage in search (more details here). This is also not very evident in our documentation, which can lead to frustrating experiences for users.

In addition, this was brought up as an experience recommendation based on a recent UX Scorecard (https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-design/-/issues/1679).

Proposal

Update our Global Search documentation to outline some of these limitations, so users can understand why certain searches will not work.

We don't need anything like a full ASCII character map.

The subset of the OWASP® Special character list would cover more than 80% of the real use cases.

" !"#$%&'()*+,-./:;<=>?@[]^_`{|}~"

An example in documentation as it pertains to Code Search.

https://docs.github.com/en/search-github/searching-on-github/searching-code#considerations-for-code-search

Click to expand process progress

Next Steps for this issue

Validation track

• checkboxes are required steps

• Bugs can skip Design and Solution Validation

• workflowvalidation backlog Problem Validation Backlog -@JohnMcGuire

  • Issue is Up-to-date
  • Prioritized in the backlog

• workflowproblem validation Problem validation - @JohnMcGuire

  • Thorough understanding of the problem
    • Problem Validation Template
    • Opportunity Canvas
      • Review of the opportunity canvas
    • UX Research
      • Validate your problem with users
    • Update issue/epic description
    • Ensure your issue is up-to-date with the latest understanding of the problem.
    • Understand and document (in the issue) the goals that people want to accomplish using the Jobs to be Done (JTBD) framework.
    • communicate the findings to Product and UX leadership.
    • PMs are strongly encouraged to open Dogfooding issues

• workflowready for design - @nickbrandt

• workflowdesign Validation phase 3: Design - @nickbrandt

  • Proposed solution(s) identified and documented
    • Diverge: explore multiple different approaches as a team
    • Think Big session.
      • document findings in Dovetail
    • Converge: identify a small set of options to validate
      • Think Small session with the team.
      • Design reviews with team
      • Low fidelity design ideas
      • Update issue/epic description with proposed solution
      • Add Figma design file link or attach design to GitLab's Design Management
      • Validate approach with help from stakeholders.
        • Run user validation using any of the proposed methods
        • Document your findings in Dovetail and appropriate GitLab issue.
      • Draw inspiration from competitive and adjacent offerings.
  • Shared understanding in the team of the proposed solution
    • Review the proposed solution as a team so that everyone has a chance to contribute
      • ask questions
      • raise concerns
      • suggest alternatives
    • Review the proposed solution with leadership.
  • Confidence in the technical feasibility
    • Discuss the technical implications with Engineering to ensure that what is being proposed is possible within the desired timeframe.
    • Engage engineering peers early and often
    • If the solution is large and complex, consider scheduling a spike to mitigate risks and uncover the optimal iteration path.
  • Updated issues/epic descriptions - @JohnMcGuire
    • Ensure issues and epics are up-to-date, so we can continue our work efficiently and asynchronously.
    • Experiment definition
  • Continue Dogfooding process

• workflowsolution validation - Validation phase 4: Solution Validation - @nickbrandt

  • High confidence in the proposed solution
    • Gather feedback from relevant stakeholders.
      • Follow solution validation guidance to gather feedback.
  • Documented Solution validation Learnings
    • Document solution validation findings as insights in Dovetail.
    • Update the opportunity canvas (if used) with relevant insights.
    • Update the issue or epic description to contain or link to the findings.

Build track

• workflowplanning breakdown - @JohnMcGuire
  • Well-scoped MVC issues
    • Issues are the SSOT for all feature development.
    • Refine issues into something that can be delivered within a single milestone
    • Open follow on issues to track work that is de-prioritized
    • Promote existing issues to Epics and open implementation issues for the upcoming milestone
    • Review feature issues with contributors
    • Consider scheduling a POC or engineering investigation issue
    • Make scope tradeoffs to reach for a right-sized MVC
    • Request an issue review to ensure communication is clear and have proposed the right iteration plan to execute on the solution.
• Prioritized in Milestone
  • The team should understand what issues should be delivered during the next milestone
• workflowready for development - @JohnMcGuire
• typebug typefeature typemaintenance - @JohnMcGuire
• Deliverable - @changzhengliu and @nickbrandt
• Add to Planning Issue - @JohnMcGuire
• Defined Quality Plan -@ebanks
  • Quad Planning
  • Test planning
• workflowrefinement - @changzhengliu
  • as needed, refine the aspects of the original feature
• workflowin dev - @changzhengliu
  • Applied by the engineer after work (including documentation) has begun on the issue. An MR is typically linked to the issue at this point.
• workflowin review - Engineering
  • Applied by an engineer indicating that all MRs required to close an issue are in review.
• workflowblocked - Engineering
  • Applied if at any time during development the issue is blocked. For example: technical issue, open question to PM or PD, cross-group dependency.
• workflowverification - Engineering
  • After the MRs in the issue have been merged, this label is applied signaling the issue needs to be verified in staging or production.
• workflowawaiting security release -Engineering
  • Applied by an engineer after the security issue has passed verification, this label signals that it is ready but awaiting the next monthly security release.
• Close the Issue - Once available in production
• Feature is available to GitLab.com hosted customers - Developer
  • Code is deployed to production.
  • Feature flag(s) enabled.
• Feature is available to self-managed customers - Developer
  • Code is included in the self-managed release (depending upon the cut-off).
• Stakeholders of a feature will know it's available in production - Developer
  • After the feature is deployed to production and any needed verification in production is completed, the development team will close the issue.
  • Prior to the issue being closed, the development team may set the workflow label to workflow::verification or workflow::production for tracking purposes.
  • Product Manager may follow up with individual stakeholders to let them know the feature is available.
• Customers will be informed about major changes - @JohnMcGuire
  • Product Manager follows the instructions in the template, which will then cause it to appear on the GitLab.com releases page and be part of the release post.