Search for more than 10 quest types at once

[NotSoImportant]

First of all: cheers. SC is an easy way to improve some map data :-)

Clicking the search button currently only checks the first 10 types of the configured ones.
So to the user it looks like there is no more quests to answer.

Use case
This is a problem

• if the user would have been able (and willing) to answer other quests than the ones shown
  (Configuring different [less] types does not help, as I might want to answer from all types, but only be able to answer one or the other concrete quest at a time)

Multiple clicks on the search button are needed to finally show all open quests (of the all configured types).

I understand it was designed like this to not overwhelme the user and have reasonable performance, but it limits the benefit a lot.
See #1874 (comment)

Proposed Solution

1. Show a banner to indicate what types have currently been searched for (e.g. "6/20 configured types")
2. Add option to search for all quests at once (of a certain area) = Download all quests in a given area #1418
   • Choose to download all quests, but only for a list of streets = [Feature Request] Preload Quests by gpx route #473 (Closed)
3. Better visualize which area quests have been loaded for (or if there are no such open quests maybe)
   • Does the zoom level make a difference on number of quests loaded?
     If yes: visualize this in the app.
4. In the the quest type configuration give a (green/yellow/red) hint on how long it could probably take to query information for this quest type
5. Is there a priority and are quests shown / search for based on it?
   • If yes: Please mention / visualize this in the app
6. Have [Meta] Switch from Overpass queries to full OSM Data download + local processing #1874 implemented (related to offline maps #122)

version: 21.0
additional keywords: details, levels, query

[NotSoImportant]

Just found this is partially a similar request as #1418

[smichel17]

…and the rather-difficult-to-find-by-searching-due-to-its-name #1874, which I believe would solve this.

[westnordost]

Yes, basically this is a duplicate of #1418 / #1874. Which will definitely be implemented (draft implementation already exists), but not soon.