On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 10:13 PM, Avlesh Singh<[email protected]> wrote:
> Or, may be just multiple facet.prefix values, Yonik; exactly the same as
> facet.field works.

The problem then becomes labels.
facet.field=foo goes under the label "foo"

We already have a mechanism to re-label results, seems like we should use that?

-Yonik
http://www.lucidimagination.com

> Cheers
> Avlesh
>
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 7:39 AM, Yonik Seeley 
> <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 9:53 PM, Avlesh Singh<[email protected]> wrote:
>> > Should multiple values for facet.prefix be supported?
>> > I have come across several use-cases on the user mailing list where such
>> a
>> > functionality could have helped (The latest one being -
>> >
>> http://www.lucidimagination.com/search/document/2a9c44d4f015b5e5/facet_filtering
>> ).
>> > I ran into one such use last night.
>> >
>> > Is there a general agreement on the enhancement?
>>
>> Yes, I think it's a good idea.
>> It's just that the current syntax doesn't quite support it yet.
>>
>> I think that once again, local params are the answer... the same as
>> they were with faceting on a single field but excluding different
>> filters.
>>
>> facet.field={!prefix=foo key=label1}myfield
>> facet.field={!prefix=bar key=label2}myfield
>>
>> -Yonik
>> http://www.lucidimagination.com
>>
>

Reply via email to