[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TIKA-1723?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14723347#comment-14723347
 ] 

Tim Allison commented on TIKA-1723:
-----------------------------------

Agreed on complexity of multilingual lang id.  You would definitely want to do 
a two-step process...I would think from a statistical perspective as well as 
from the perspective you point out: majority lang for the doc, etc.  

This was in the back of my mind as an "eventually, wouldn't this be nice," but 
I think we're still a good way away from that.

Apologies for my lack of clarity, what I meant by "dual language detection and 
content handling" was: allow for identification of the overall language of the 
document at the same time that you are handling/writing out regular content, 
say, to an outputstream or a byte buffer via the usual ToTextHandler (or 
friend).  I realize that you can probably do this via some kind of wrapping of 
the writer, but it seems like we might want to move this into the handler.

> Integrate language-detector into Tika
> -------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: TIKA-1723
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TIKA-1723
>             Project: Tika
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: languageidentifier
>    Affects Versions: 1.11
>            Reporter: Ken Krugler
>            Assignee: Ken Krugler
>            Priority: Minor
>         Attachments: TIKA-1723.patch, TIKA-1723v2.patch
>
>
> The language-detector project at 
> https://github.com/optimaize/language-detector is faster, has more languages 
> (70 vs 13) and better accuracy than the built-in language detector.
> This is a stab at integrating it, with some initial findings. There are a 
> number of issues this raises, especially if [~chrismattmann] moves forward 
> with turning language detection into a pluggable extension point.
> I'll add comments with results below.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Reply via email to