Jeff,
I've spent some time (several hours, in fact -- I'm a little slow)
poking about on the Lucene site and its links in an attempt to
understand more about the search process. I even downloaded and tried
to read the two sample chapters from Lucene in Action. That book
certainly wasn't
On Mon, Sep 25, 2006 at 03:16:06PM -0700, Jeff Marshall wrote:
In major search engines like Google and Yahoo, this relevance ordering
makes the most sense.
Google Groups and Google News both offer a choice of date or
relevance (date being most recent first).
Perhaps in our specialized
On September 27, 2006 at 17:44, Olly Betts wrote:
On Mon, Sep 25, 2006 at 03:16:06PM -0700, Jeff Marshall wrote:
In major search engines like Google and Yahoo, this relevance ordering
makes the most sense.
Google Groups and Google News both offer a choice of date or
relevance (date
Hi Jeff,
I don't know what to say. On the one hand I appreciate the work you
all do in making the Mail Archive available, and for no charge.
On the other hand I still feel the search feature is a weak spot for
the casual user. You've illustrated the dazzling capabilities of the
new search
Jeff,
I really *still* would like to be able to access all of the messages
in the sundial archive by date. I guess I've figured out how to
locate the most recent 10,000, but how to get to the earliest?
Do you find date search useful? For example:
date:1997*
My results from searching
JM, can you look into sorting results by newest-first?
I can. The only downside with sorting results by newest-first is that
you lose the relevance ordering. Right now, results are displayed
according to the search engine's concept of most relevant first.
In major search engines like
