On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 4:25 PM, Marcel Reutegger <[email protected]> wrote: > but I guess we cannot easily change this > behavior, because of backward compatibility
I wonder how applications could rely on this. rep:similar is kind of a "fuzzy" query, so nothing you would rely code upon. I guess it's only useful (and used) for full text search pages, ie. it is directly passed on to the human user. >. maybe we can add a third optional > parameter that tells the function to exclude the base node? Might be a solution, but I would prefer if we could live without that. Maybe we should have a poll on users@ to get some insights on how people use rep:similar. Regards, Alex -- Alexander Klimetschek [email protected]
