Thanks for your input. I will delete the comments. We do have a policy about deleting comments in the ref guide after they have been addressed. I'm not a fan of ref guide comments.
On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 9:44 AM Timothy Rodriguez (BLOOMBERG/ 120 PARK) < trodrigue...@bloomberg.net> wrote: > Looks good! The only thing is the comments are now dated relative to the > documentation and may be a bit confusing. Maybe it makes sense to delete > them? Not sure if the current strategy is to keep them forever for > posterity. A user could theoretically pull up previous versions and have > the comments make sense. > > From: david.w.smi...@gmail.com At: 01/18/17 00:23:50 > To: Timothy Rodriguez (BLOOMBERG/ 120 PARK), dev@lucene.apache.org > Subject: Re: Solr Ref Guide, Highlighting > > I think I'm done. I integrated information from the 3 sub-pages into the > Highlighting master page. At this point I'd like to delete those 3 pages > and remove the info box about a renovation being in-progress. > > > > On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 6:03 PM David Smiley <david.w.smi...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Solr 6.4 is the first release to introduce the UnifiedHighlighter as a new > highlighter option. I want to get it documented reasonably well in the > Solr Ref Guide. The Highlighters section is here: Highlighting > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/Highlighting> (lets > see if this formatted email expands to the URL when it lands on the list) > > Unless anyone objects, I'd like to rename the "Standard Highlighter" as > "Original Highlighter" in the ref guide. The original Highlighter has no > actual name qualifications as it was indeed Lucene's original Highlighter. > "Standard Highlighter" as a name purely exists as-such within the Solr > Reference Guide only. In our code it's used by "DefaultSolrHighlighter" > which is really a combo of the original Highlighter and > FastVectorHighlighter. DSH ought to be refactored perhaps... but I > digress. > > For those that haven't read CHANGES.txt yet, there is a new "hl.method" > parameter which can be used to pick your highlighter. Here I purposely > chose a possible value of "original" to choose the original Highlighter > (not "standard"). > > I haven't started documenting yet but I plan to refactor the highlighter > docs a bit. The intro page will better discuss the highlighter options and > also how to configure both term vectors and offsets in postings. Then the > highlighter implementation specific pages will document the parameters and > any configuration specific to them. I'm a bit skeptical we need a page > dedicated to the PostingsHighlighter as the UnifiedHighlighter is a > derivative of it, supporting all it's options and more. In that sense, > maybe people are fine with it only being in the ref guide as a paragraph or > two on the UH page describing how to activate it. I suppose it's > effectively deprecated. > > ~ David > -- > Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker > LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book: > http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com > > -- > Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker > LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book: > http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com > > -- Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book: http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com
