[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4369?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13452947#comment-13452947
]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-4369:
-------------------------------------
{quote}
The problem with ExactMatch field is: If it is also stored, the name is
misleasing again, so KeywordField is better.
{quote}
I dont understand how storing is related. storing is the same always.
{quote}
If we would 100% differentiate between stored and indexed fields while indexing
(requiring that the field is also added 2 times, one time as indexed and one
time as indexed), I would be fine with "MatchOnlyField" and "StoredStringField".
{quote}
In my opinion the only thing worse we could do to our .document API than
StringField would be to require the user to add the field twice.
> StringFields name is unintuitive and not helpful
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-4369
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4369
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Attachments: LUCENE-4369.patch
>
>
> There's a huge difference between TextField and StringField, StringField
> screws up scoring and bypasses your Analyzer.
> (see java-user thread "Custom Analyzer Not Called When Indexing" as an
> example.)
> The name we use here is vital, otherwise people will get bad results.
> I think we should rename StringField to MatchOnlyField.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
