Searching for comics would be so much easier if you could search pools by the tags of the all the images in a given pool

Or alternatively, an optional feature for regular search that condenses multiple images from the same pool into one result. This would also help with the occasional issue of comics uploaded all at once taking up half the search results page.

ohgoshohhecc said:
Searching for comics would be so much easier if you could search pools by the tags of the all the images in a given pool

Or alternatively, an optional feature for regular search that condenses multiple images from the same pool into one result. This would also help with the occasional issue of comics uploaded all at once taking up half the search results page.

Type pool: then the pool and tag(s) you're looking for

nekozuki said:
Type pool: then the pool and tag(s) you're looking for

I'm pretty sure that the OP does not want to search for images within a specific pool. They want to find new pools based on the tags of the posts within.
The actual way to do this would be something like inpool:true male horse. Not quite what they are asking for, but close.

We need poolindex first:

https://e621.net/forum_topics/22369

Should be much easier to implement, and you could use it to get only one image from each pool, such as the cover page. Not as good as searching all tags across the entire pool, but it could be used to narrow things down.

lance_armstrong said:
We need poolindex first:

https://e621.net/forum_topics/22369

Should be much easier to implement, and you could use it to get only one image from each pool, such as the cover page. Not as good as searching all tags across the entire pool, but it could be used to narrow things down.

While that would be a useful feature on its own, it's not too helpful here. Cover pages are not always representative of the content in the rest of the pool.

bitwolfy said:
While that would be a useful feature on its own, it's not too helpful here. Cover pages are not always representative of the content in the rest of the pool.

As long as something simple like poolindex isn't implemented, there is probably no hope for this feature request.

I kinda also literally just said something like this somewhere else.
i said pools should be searchable, and pools inherit all (or the common) the tags from all their members

Sorry to necro but I was curious about something in regards to this idea. Is it not possible to implement a tag system to pools themselves and have them adopt the tags of the posts within them? That would pretty much be what OP was asking

That would either require querying every member of a pool with every search term for every search (far from ideal) or adding a new field to pools in the database that collects all of the tags of each pool post together & auto-updating it each time a new post is added or a post is edited, while properly keeping track of which tags (including implications) came from which posts & updating accordingly, along with also retroactively updating every current pool with this new field (feasible, but a hell of a lot of work, and with the recent database shenanigans , not one the staff is likely to be eager to take up). On top of that, both of these would also require updating wiki pages & the actual UI & functionality of the pool search page. Nothing's impossible, it's just that this is represents a big opportunity cost for what may be a niche use case. If someone really wants this to happen, the best chance would be to do it themselves; e6 is open source , so someone could just do it themselves and pitch it to the staff. Of course, that's won't ensure it will happen, but it makes it probable. People have been asking for grouped searches for over 5 years, and it got added a couple weeks ago b/c 2 people (Tarragon & myself ) took it upon themselves to do it. Since this is likely both a bigger feature to add then that was & less widely requested, I imagine this'll go the same way; it's not gonna happen unless a community member really wants it and takes the time to do it. It's just not enough value to be worth the work for the dev team of 1 person to do it themselves, especially at the cost of any other little changes that would be given up in service of it.

This feature is already available through a third-party script, see topic #44841.