Seriously, THIS is how search should look

[rworange]

First question, is ingredients gone?

I loved that little database. It was really useful and packed with info

Anyway, I was trying to find the ingredient database to find info about sugar.

Searching on Chow for 'sugar' I didn't turn up anything. Then I found tags (also found at the bottom of each page)
http://www.chow.com/tags?letter=a

I click on "sugar" and this lovely search result came up
http://www.chow.com/tags/sugar?tag=bd;main_body

The layout and type is beautiful and readable. There is consistancy in the results for all parts of Chow. It is currently a way to seach Chow and Chowhound at the same time ... why did anyone think that was a good idea to split?

Now look at the results if you use the search at the top of the current site pages.
Stories and Blogs
http://www.chow.com/search?query=sugar
Recipes (good grief)
http://www.chow.com/recipes?tag=chow_header_inner;chow_top_nav_inner
Chowhound
http://www.chow.com/search?query=sugar&board_name=San+Francisco+Bay+Area&search_board_id=1&type=Topic

If you click on 'more' for those same sections in the tag search here's the comparison
http://www.chow.com/tags/sugar/stories
http://www.chow.com/tags/sugar/recipes
http://www.chow.com/tags/sugar/topics

It doesn't seem like such a stretch to be able to put the advanced options at the top of the page.

Why can't search be standardized like this? You have a good base to build on that currentlly exists. All you have to do is add Restaurants and The Digest. There is a little info in the seach results that could be easily added.

The irony of this is someone will probably go in now and change the tags search ... or remove that link

[hannaone]

A no frills list -
http://www.chow.com/sitemap/ingredien...

[rworange]

I love you hannaone. I've bookmarked it. Ironicaally nothing about sugar, but I use it often enough that this will really come in hand.

[greygarious]

I bookmarked it too - but really, how hard would it have been to alphabetize the list???

[Caitlin McGrath]

There is an entry for sugar in the database: http://www.chow.com/ingredients/298

I agree it would be much more helpful to have it alphabetized, but I use find on page instead of trying to scroll through, if I know what I'm looking for.

Also, in the "good" search result in your OP, there's a link to the ingredient entry over on the right under "Reference."

[hannaone]

I've built an ingredient search (no frills) that includes chow ingredients as an option.
I put the link on my profile page.

Copy and paste the link from "My "Go-to" dinner party dish"

[rworange]

Nice. Thanks. I bookmarked it. Nice website. I alwayys wanted to know more about Korean food.

[hannaone]

I've added Cooks Thesaurus and the Epicurious dictionary to that search tool.
I wish Chow would add an "Ingredient Search" so that we wouldn't have to come up with "discovery" workarounds.

[greygarious]

What would you like such a feature to include beyond the results you get by searching for an ingredient in the "tags" link at the bottom of the page? It seems plenty comprehensive.

[hannaone]

The ability to actually search instead of relying on tags that may not include the ingredient you want to find, or go through a series of pages to get to the ingredient page.

For example -
When I click the "sugar" tag at the bottom of this page I get this result:
http://www.chow.com/tags/sugar

Then to get the actual ingredient page I have to click "sugar" in the reference block on the right side of that page

http://www.chow.com/ingredients/298

[greygarious]

OK - I guess we differ on the level of convenience required. The current features are adequate for me. However, I DO think that there should be a help button or some other obvious feature that explains what the tag feature provides. As is, it's something of an "Easter egg".

[thew]

seriously. +1,000,000

there is no reason not to make this obvious and easy to use