> I noticed you added that... albeit it's the components for building a > highlighter, so it isn't as ready-made as the others; right? >
It... depends. There is a lot of flexibility there - that's for sure. And indeed, I'd consider it rather low-level but it can be used as a highlighter at the top-level - I use it with Solr a lot, actually. It may be that I botched the API so that it's not clear how to use it - it should really be simpler than what's in there. Sorry. > I presume if a user was too dissatisfied with the other highlighters, > their next best course would be somewhat DIY using the MatchHighlighter > That is correct. I believe what was missing for me was highlighting multiple queries at once, configuring snippet generation when no highlights were present (leading text) and some issues with offset/ position gaps... I can't remember, to be honest. > Would it make sense for any of the UnifiedHighlighter to use the > MatchHighlighter's components? > >> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley> >>> >> I don't know this either - perhaps the answer is yes. It's a situation similar to query parsers - there are a number of them out there and they live their parallel lives... :) Dawid
