[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3318?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13066232#comment-13066232
]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-3318:
-------------------------------------
{quote}
I do think it will be good to maintain the ability to highlight using whatever
information is available, though.
{quote}
Well, the traditional school of thought has been, to do this (e.g.
highlighters/morelikethis today that can work with tvs or without them).
Personally I disagree with this reasoning. I think the whole point of indexing
your content is to make searching fast: and we should make highlighting first
class and make it kick ass.
I guess a compromise would be to fall back to existing TVs, but not to
re-analyzing the document at runtime: I guess I think that providing "slow
options" is not actually user-friendly but instead just causes confusion and
performance problems... better to kick out an error and say 'you must index
your content with XYZ for this to work at all'.
> Sketch out highlighting based on term positions / position iterators
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-3318
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3318
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: modules/highlighter
> Affects Versions: Positions Branch
> Reporter: Simon Willnauer
> Assignee: Mike Sokolov
> Fix For: Positions Branch
>
>
> Spinn off from LUCENE-2878. Since we have positions on a large number of
> queries already in the branch is worth looking at highlighting as a real
> consumer of the API. A prototype is already committed.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
