Same as previously reported in ‘Interface glitch on entering single select options [Bug?]’ but this is still a problem. When creating the first option, it is easy to overlook that the box is for searching and instead enter the option there, then create it with add option, but then search is still live so none of the other options created will show up, so you keep creating them repeatedly and they actually exist in the background. It would be helpful to hide the search box until at least one option exists, or move it so that one is less likely to use it as the create entry box.
I realise that the error here is on the user’s part, but it happens repeatedly and a change in the design could avoid frustration. Thanks.
Seeing it re-written by @FJL , and as the original poster, I can say two things:
I’m now so used to the current design that I’m not only aware of this when I edit single select columns, but I actually teach this to new users right from the start. So over time, this is less and less a concern.
However, I see the irony: As far as I see, the functionality is designed to avoid double entries by allowing a combined “search and enter new if not found“ workflow. Something that I’m dearly missing in a lot of programs. It pains me to see that this functionality may actually lead to more of the stuff it is designed to avoid: Double entries
Why not erase the search box content (and reset the filter) after the user has created the new entry? You may disagree, but for me, the user story goes like this:
“I want a new(?) option. Let’s search for it first to avoid double entries“
“Hey, the search returned nothing, but the system is intelligent enough to offer me this as a new entry“
“Let’s start over again with the next entry - search, cheack, create“
The only scenario I can think of where the current behaviour helps is searching for n entries that contain a string, and then manually change them one by one, until none is visible in the (still filtered) list.
