Re: Field.omitTF

t least the ones I've read), >> should this be considered as a bug or ... ? >> >> Thanks >> >> -John >> >> On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 2:05 PM, Mark Miller >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> Drops positions as well. >>> &

Re: Field.omitTF

ons as well. - Mark On Dec 18, 2008, at 4:57 PM, "John Wang" wrote: Hi: In lucene 2.4, when Field.omitTF() is called, payload is disabled as well. Is this intentional? My understanding is payload is independent from the te

Re: Field.omitTF

t;John Wang" wrote: > > Hi: >> In lucene 2.4, when Field.omitTF() is called, payload is disabled as >> well. Is this intentional? My understanding is payload is independent from >> the term frequencies. >> >> Thanks >> >> -John >> >

Re: Field.omitTF

Drops positions as well. - Mark On Dec 18, 2008, at 4:57 PM, "John Wang" wrote: Hi: In lucene 2.4, when Field.omitTF() is called, payload is disabled as well. Is this intentional? My understanding is payload is independent from the term frequencies. Tha

Field.omitTF

Hi: In lucene 2.4, when Field.omitTF() is called, payload is disabled as well. Is this intentional? My understanding is payload is independent from the term frequencies. Thanks -John