OK, I have a clear answer on some details here.
I debugged this and want to share the exact results with you, I believe you will not have trouble understanding the details even if technical.
Please ask me any thing if something is not clear.
1. The "hide_empty" Attribute was introduced in Toolset Views Version 1.5.0:
New: hide_empty option for parametric search filtering by taxonomy
2. It is never mentioned to be added to the GUI at all in our changelog, which at first surprised me, but probably it was there since the begin of the attribute's life:
/*
'hide_empty' => array(
// @deprecated in 2.4.0
'label' => __( 'Hide empty', 'wpv-views'),
'type' => 'select',
'default' => 'false',
'options' => array(
'false' => __( 'Show', 'wpv-views' ),
'true' => __( 'Hide', 'wpv-views' ),
),
'description' => __( 'Hide empty terms.', 'wpv-views' ),
),
*/
3. It is not in the GUI in 2.5.1 obviously as it's commented now + has a @deprecated in 2.4.0 notice
4. Cleary it still exists and is working in the code:
$atts = shortcode_atts(
array(
'taxonomy' => '',
'url_param' => '',
'type' => '',
'default_label' => '',
'format' => '%%NAME%%',
'orderby' => '',
'order' => '',
'output' => 'bootstrap',
'hide_empty' => 'false',
'style' => '',
'class' => '',
'label_style' => '',
'label_class' => ''
),
$atts
);
5. There are also more note that this is deprecated:
Legacy: hide terms without assigned posts
We can conclude that the attribute does exactly what it says (as you also confirmed earlier).
It is deprecated hence new features will not be added to it. It will work "as is".
The attribute does exactly what it promises:
hide terms without assigned posts
It does not mention "current queried post type" or similar, and hence not intended for this particular need.
The only way to accomplish what you need is with the global settings as mentioned earlier:
Custom Search Settings > Which options to display in the form inputs:
- Show only available options for each input
What we can do is allow more control on that setting. But this will require some Development work, and I am not sure we will implement this.
I can ask, if you agree that this would solve the issue for you?