> > Having a query language that can express all the query capabilities
> > supported
> > by Lucene will allow programmers to construct a string
> > representation of the
> > query and then 'compile' it using the query parser. This way,
> > one don't
> > have to learn the internal representation of the various
> > query classes.
>
> This is not what the query parser is intended for. The query parser is
> intended to parse the contents of a single text box entered by a user. A
> developer should be able to assemble more complex queries from a
> set of form values using the query API.
Yes, this is what it is intended to do (you should know, if you wrote it
;-) )
and it does it well.
>
> Is the query API too complex?
>
No, for a Java API it is defined very reasonably.
> Java's a good language for composing objects. There's no need to invent a
> "query scripting language" here--just use Java.
IMHO, for programmers new to Lucene that need to construct a query (for
example, from
several fields of an Advanced Search field), it will easier to learn a
simple
language for constructing queries rather than learning the Query API (kind
of the
difference between programming in Assembler or in C). And considering that
we
are almost 80% there, I think it will be worth while.
Tal
>
> Doug
>
_______________________________________________
Lucene-dev mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lucene-dev
