[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1689?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12719104#action_12719104
 ] 

Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-1689:
--------------------------------------------

Robert, could you flesh this patch out to a committable point?  Ie, handle 
unpaired surrogates, add test case that first shows that LowercaseFilter 
incorrectly breaks up surrogates?  Thanks!

bq. it depends upon the knowledge that no surrogate pairs lowercase to BMP 
codepoints

Is it invalid to make this assumption?  Ie, does the unicode standard not 
guarantee it?

> supplementary character handling
> --------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-1689
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1689
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Robert Muir
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 2.9
>
>         Attachments: LUCENE-1689_lowercase_example.txt
>
>
> for Java 5. Java 5 is based on unicode 4, which means variable-width encoding.
> supplementary character support should be fixed for code that works with 
> char/char[]
> For example:
> StandardAnalyzer, SimpleAnalyzer, StopAnalyzer, etc should at least be 
> changed so they don't actually remove suppl characters, or modified to look 
> for surrogates and behave correctly.
> LowercaseFilter should be modified to lowercase suppl. characters correctly.
> CharTokenizer should either be deprecated or changed so that isTokenChar() 
> and normalize() use int.
> in all of these cases code should remain optimized for the BMP case, and 
> suppl characters should be the exception, but still work.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org

Reply via email to