: I thought about this too. It is what Local Solr currently does : (although it expects a certain prefix, too, I believe). However, it : seems a bit unnecessary, as now the user needs to use both the field : type and the dynamic field in order to get it to work, whereas I don't : think they should have to do that, as it isn't in line with the notion : of a field type. FieldTypes currently can be used for any fields, both : regular and dynamic.
we already have FieldTypes that only make sense when used as either a <field/> or as a <dynamicField/> ... RandomField only makes sense when used as a dynamicField, ExternalValueField doesn't make sense if you try to use it as a dynamicField -- it's just hte nature of specialized FieldTypes. It's one thing to say that we don't want "search/index users" to have to know about the details of how these fields work -- i agree with that, they should just be be able to index and query against a "location" field and have it work, without knowing that "location" actually builds up a bunch of cartisien grid fields using names like "location_0DAB9" ... but i think it's perfectly acceptible to ask that the "schema creator / solr addministrator" have som understanding of these special field types, and to tell them "you need to declare these as <dynamicField/> because they add other low level fields using that prefix/suffix that you don't need to worry about." The admin type users are going to need to know about these automagically created fields one way or another -- if not to prevent collision, then to make sure they don't get confused when they look at Luke and the schema browser. -Hoss
