[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3318?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13066465#comment-13066465
]
Mark Miller commented on LUCENE-3318:
-------------------------------------
bq. but why not just force the user to use the algorithm they want?
That I don't mind - just that the option exists if it's possible. Whether you
choose through a setter or a different sub class, I don't mind. If it's not
possible to re-analyze without keeping the other Highlighters around too, I'm
much less for keeping the option around (at the least, the old highlighters
should be heavily de-emphasized compared to the new one). I have not looked at
the new code yet though.
> 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
