On Apr 3, 2004, at 11:24 AM, Tatu Saloranta wrote:
On Saturday 03 April 2004 08:34, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:On Saturday 03 April 2004 17:11, Erik Hatcher wrote:No objections that error messages and such could be made clearer.
Patches welcome! Care to submit better error message handling in this
case? Or perhaps allow lower-case "to"?
I think the best would be if Lucene would simply have a setCaseSensitive(boolean).
IMHO it's in any case a bad idea to make searches case-sensitive (per default).
I'd have to disagree. I think that search engine core should not have to
bother with details of character sets, such as lower-casing. Rules for
lower/upper/initial/mixed case for all Unicode-languages are rather
involved... and if you tried to do that, next thing would be whether
accentuation and umlaut marks should matter or not (which is language
dependant). That's why to me the natural way to go is to do direct
comparison, ignoring case when executing queries. This does not prevent
anyone from implementing such functionality (see below).
I think architecture and design of Lucene core is delightfully simple. One can
easily create case-independent functionality by using proper analyzers, and
(for the most part), configuring QueryParser. I would agree, however, that
QueryParser is "victim of its success"; it's too often used in situations
where one really should create proper GUI that builds the query. Backend code
can then mangle input as it sees fit, and build query objects.
QueryParser is more natural for quick-n-dirty scenarios, where one just has to
slap something together quickly, or if one only has textual interface to deal
with. It's nice thing to have, but it has its limitations; there's no way to
create one parser that's perfect for every use(r).
What could be done would be to make sure all examples / demo web apps would
implement case-insensitive indexing and searching, since that is often what
is needed?
-+ Tatu +-
But, also, folks need to really step back and practice basic
troubleshooting skills. I asked you if that string was what you passed
to the QueryParser and you said yes, when in fact it was not. And you
I forgot that I did lower-case it. I fact I even output it in it's original
state but lower-case it just before I pass it to lucene. That lower-casing
is what I would call a hack and hence it's no surprise that I forgot it :-)
Timo
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
