That’s how it works on [insert most other websites here] with the same browser. 
Same thing happens with the logbook on Firefox, btw.
but as others have said… that’s simple html. Your asking to find things that aren’t loaded… It’s fruitless for me to argue this at this point. Good luck with your WTH
1 Like
Why do you say it’s not loaded though? That’s what I don’t understand. What part of it is not loaded? If it’s not loaded then turning off Wifi and scrolling would give me a blank window, but that’s not the case.
I’m not trying to be difficult, that’s just the way I am, apparently.
It’s not loaded into the browser. The find function built into browsers searches whats loaded onto the page. When you scroll, things that are out of view are destroyed (typically by the browser), then when you scroll back, they are created again.
Just take a look at it yourself. In chrome, hit F12. Select the whole element and scroll down to the bottom on the shown html. You’ll see that the last loaded item is only a few elements below the bottom of your screen.
The 2 red boxes are the last visible items.
Orange box is the last item that is loaded into the ‘view’.
A good comparison would be this discussion forum thread. You can’t use the native cntrl-f find to search the entire thread, because only a small part of it are loaded into the view. The need to search is common, so ctrl-f is hijacked to be replaced with a (I’m guessing) js-powered search that searches the entire thread contents, instead of just the browser loaded view.
I think the non-obvious thing for most folks is that the Logbook is a dynamically loaded/changed view. It’s a simple enough page that loads very quick (unlike scrolling fast on Twitter, this forum, etc) and so makes it non-obvious that it’s loading each page on the fly.
I can appreciate the desire for the cntrl-f find, but if I could have only one (due to development time/effort), I’d go with the more general purpose filters linked earlier, since it’s more powerful.
3 Likes
That makes sense; the part about it dynamically loading into active memory instead of the (incorrect) argument that it was saving processing on the server, especially so.
I don’t understand the filter part, but many times per day I try to search for certain elements (without reaching for my mouse) Abe am disappointed that it only searches what’s visible (“loaded”).
This forum & Twitter, however are different in that what is not loaded, is actually downloaded on the fly whereas the logbook page is downloaded in its entirety but (due to JavaScript?) it has been decided to only load certain parts of it.
It’s not incorrect if you load everything in your history to find them, which was the point I was making.
Wasn’t meant to be a jab.
Then why even say it?
Because multiple people were giving incorrect advice throughout many replies, and I was trying to summarize what’s been said, as this topic is spiraling (as evidenced that I’m even typing this message) and it seems pretty clear that whatever point was trying to be made is now being overtaken by answers to a question that wasn’t asked. I appreciate your help, & this isn’t personal.