On 12/5/05, Erik Hatcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Having an XML format representing a Query > and a mechanism to parse it into an actual Query instance makes a lot > of sense.
Certainly. A representation is needed where it is very easy to add support for new queries, flexible enough to handle *all* query types, and can easily accomodate change (such as minNrShouldMatch being added to BooleanQuery). XML is still far and away the most popular, and hence that makes the most sense. > The proposed LISP, Python, etc formats don't add anything > to the equation, and actually complicate it. Yes, scripting is rather orthogonal to query representation. There is one little problem with XML though... It's inability to directly represent binary data, or even all unicode code points (no, entities don't fix this). I use binary data in lucene to represent some numerics, and that can't be represented in standard XML. An application specific escaping mechanism can be used, but then you are a step away from standard XML. example: <tag>�</tag> is not valid XML If we go with XML, I think this must be solved (or else we are at the point where we can only represent a subset of queries that lucene can handle again). -Yonik --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
