I'm raising my objection to -1 for the updated syntax. Let's make
that a
post 1.3 (2.0, is my suggestion) feature.
Users tend to stick to a released version for very long. A lot of
users (we too) still use Solr 1.2. That means we are going to see this
syntax for atleast another year after which we will ask the users to
switch to a new syntax which they have been using for the past 2+
years.
I don't like <lst name="nodename"> either, but I don't think
<nodename> fixes it. Especially with the backwards compatibility
issues (complications).
In 2.0 we should have a more considered syntax -- hopefully something
someone could buy a book (if necessary) to understand (spring)
so I'm -1 on changing the syntax for 1.3
ryan
