Erik, When is "Lucene in Action" scheduled to be out?
Regards, Terry ----- Original Message ----- From: "Erik Hatcher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Lucene Users List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 5:04 AM Subject: Re: extensible query parser - Re: Proximity Searches behavior > On Jun 9, 2004, at 4:39 PM, David Spencer wrote: > >> I like the idea of a flexible run-time grammar, but it sounds too > >> good to be true in a general purpose kinda way. > > > > My idea isn't perfect for humans, but at least lets you use queries > > not hard coded. > > But in my idealistic view, getting something (near) perfect for humans > is what a QueryParser is all about. And, of course, this is domain and > application specific in a lot of ways. > > > [5] the point > > > > Be backward compatible and "natural" for existing query syntax, but > > leave a hook so that if you innovate and define new query expansion > > code there's some hope of someone using it as they can in theory drop > > it in and use it w/o coding. Right now if you create some code in this > > area I suspect there's little chance people will try it out as there's > > too much friction to try it out. > > I'm still grasping for a happy medium between the current QueryParser > and this idea of an awkward syntax general purpose pluggable parser. > > Interestingly the current QueryParser is pluggable in some interesting > ways thanks to the getters for each query time being overridable. For > example, disallowing wildcard and fuzzy queries, enhancing range query > to handle different formats, and changing PhraseQuery into a > SpanNearQuery are all tricks I'm including in Lucene in Action. > > Erik > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
