hpchavaz

It is a problem.

Thanks to Evernote for introducing the ability to include sub-tags in tag-based filtering. However it seems that this functionality is implemented by generating a query on a database which poses the following problem: When we ask for the inclusion of the sub-tags of a parent tag with a large descendant tree (many children or deep tree, or even tags with long labels), a message indicating that the query cannot be longer than 4096 characters appears. This is all the more annoying as it is in the case of complex trees that the feature is most useful.

I have 14 000 notes most of the are multi-tagged. Even if Evernote didn't had a limit on the number of notes that can be processed in a batch, it wouldn't be a matter of a rainy weekend but of a rainy year. I could certainly use the API but for that you have to do some development, as long as you don't violate the processing limits. But for Python, the only interface that is not in beta status, is based on an abandoned version of python.

That is the point. Some parent tags may be directly linked to notes.

Thanks to Evernote for introducing the possibility to include sub-tags in filtering based on tags. This feature was requested for a long time, also to emulate it, we used to add tags appearing higher in the hierarchy: parent tags. Now it would be convenient to remove them. This could be done for example by adding to the menu that appears for a tag, the possibility to remove the tags further down in the hierarchy.

It worked. thanks.

I should have done that as it is working in the web app.

A new feature has been introduced allowing when filtering on the basis of a tag to also include sub-tags. This feature has been requested for a long time, thanks to Evernote for introducing it. However, at least in Evernote 10.32.4 on Windows, but I have every reason to believe that the problem is not specific to this version: The choice between "include subtags" and "exclude subtags" seems to produce the opposite effect of what is expected. More precisely, I could see that when filtering on the basis of two tags, including the sub-tags makes the notes disappear.

I understand the the reservations of @gazumped and @Mike P but it would only be an option. @Mike P tip is help full.

As the two (very similar) functions described below or simple and quick way to obtain the same result do not seem to exist When using templates, the corresponding notes : - will often be filed in the same notebook - will often have the same tags The proposal is therefore to link to the template when creating it: - a notebook - tags Incidentally, it would be necessary to make the management of templates easier: - edition - sorting etc.

I agree, this is not a feature but a plain bug.

I may have missed something. But, this day 2020/12/28 at 10:26 (CET UT+1), I saved 3 notes from Chrome with Webclipper (version: 7.13.8.31-f3c4893). For these 3 notes, I found (under Windows App version 10.5.0 2114 beta) that the public link was active. This behavior has since stopped.

@DTLow wrote "My suggestion to Evernote is for a properly formatted link with note title and url" I may have missed something but it doesn't seem like a good idea at this point. Public links have a double purpose: 1/ Public sharing 2/ Sharing with people who do not have an Evernote account and do not want to have one. In the second case, it does not seem reasonable to me to have a URL giving an idea of the contents of the note for reasons of confidentiality.

I may be making a mistake posting here, the functionality may be in the Windows beta application. During a search in the text of a note, even though the search matches exactly the one that found the note, the text is not always found even though it is present in the note. At least, this was the case with a search of the form 'A-999/99' where 'A' is a letter and '9' is a number.