Hi Stephane (found this mail in my draft, sorry for the delay)
On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 6:39 PM, Stephane Gamard <[email protected]> wrote: > While we're at it, and since it does not hurt basically, I would propose > that we can add the following attributes to any VirtualProperties: > - isSearchable > Don't get this. Why should somebody define a non-searcheable virtual property? > - isType (high level, ie: name, text, date, quantity, …) > ok, could you give the complete list of them with a short description. Cheers, Reto > > This could greatly improve search retrieval and quality over the time of > next implementation. These attributes might not be mandatory at all, but > can have a great added value. > > _Stephane > > > On October 2, 2013 at 6:31:13 PM, Stephane Gamard ([email protected]) > wrote: > > Hi Team, > > As I dive deeper and deeper into my learning and updates on the rdf.cris > I've come to realise that the Faceting implementation is not optimal for > Lucene. We're experiencing extremely slow faceting do to the post-search > facet collector that iterates thru the document list untill hits.length. > > It would be fairly trivial now to implement facets as per Lucene > specifications. The most "drastic" change that I am yet too ignorant to try > for myself is to have the ability to know when a VirtualProperty should be > considered for faceting at indexing time. > > This would require a small update of the DefinitionGraph by maybe adding a > property "facetable" for VirtualProperties? > > _Stephane > > >
