: I see that edismax already defines pf (bigrams) and pf3 (trigrams) -- how : would folks think about just calling them pf / pf1 (aliases for each : other?), pf2, and pf3? The pf would then behave exactly as it does in : dismax.
changing edismax's current pasing logic to be applied to a "pf2" param and restoring the original "pf" logic certainly makes sense -- but i think it would be a mistake to have a "pf1" field that was an alias for "pf" ... as it stands the "pf" parm in dismax is analogous to a "pf*" or "pf-Infinity" type option requiring all of the words however many tehre are ... in the context of "pf2" and "pf3" a "pf1" option would imply that it did a phrase boosting on each individual word -- which wouldnt' be very useful at all (tht'as what qf is for) -Hoss
