Clemens Marschner wrote:
> Doug, do you think the ranking function as stated in the FAQ
> (http://lucene.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/faq/faqmanager.cgi?file=chapter.searc
> h&toc=faq#q31 is still correct after the recent changes?
Yes, this equation is still correct, although it's now incomplete.
The
Hi,
Doug, do you think the ranking function as stated in the FAQ
(http://lucene.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/faq/faqmanager.cgi?file=chapter.searc
h&toc=faq#q31 is still correct after the recent changes?
Clemens
- Original Message -
From: "Doug Cutting" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROT
it's amazing!
in september I'll implement our news archive where we try to score the documents based
on text relevancy and relative frequency of article's downloads/read (it's an
e-magazine).
peter
> -Original Message-
> From: Doug Cutting [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, J
Doug , you are amazing!!
ciao.
--
On Mon, 29 Jul 2002 12:31:49
Doug Cutting wrote:
>FYI, I just added document and field boosting to Lucene. It should be
>in tonight's nightly build.
>
>This lets one, e.g., implement Google-like ranking, where a factor in a
>document's score is determined i
