At 09:04 PM 9/7/01 -0700, Mark Davis wrote: >I disagree. What you want is a merged database field. See >http://www.macchiato.com/slides/icu_collation.ppt > >Mark Mark, David took the remainder of our discussion off the alias. I won't repeat it here, just to note that we've agreed that merged database fields are the answer to (some) of the scenarios that we've discussed, but that there are cases (like indexing a mixed corpus where both naive and naïve occur) where it might indeed make sense to ignore accent differences altogether - although, as is often the case, dictionary-based pre- or post processing or manual adjustments might give better results yet. Thanks for your pointer to the presentation. A./
- Re: [OT] o-circumflex David Gallardo
- Re: [OT] o-circumflex Michael \(michka\) Kaplan
- RE: [OT] o-circumflex Timothy Greenwood
- RE: [OT] o-circumflex Ayers, Mike
- Re: [OT] o-circumflex Asmus Freytag
- RE: [OT] o-circumflex Asmus Freytag
- Re: [OT] o-circumflex Mark Davis
- RE: [OT] o-circumflex Carl W. Brown
- Re: [OT] o-circumflex Lars Marius Garshol
- Re: [OT] o-circumflex Mark Davis
- Re: [OT] o-circumflex Asmus Freytag
- Re: [OT] o-circumflex DougEwell2
- RE: [OT] o-circumflex Carl W. Brown
- Re: [OT] o-circumflex Francesco Zappa Nardelli
- Re: [OT] o-circumflex David Gallardo
- Re: [OT] o-circumflex Mark Davis
- Re: [OT] o-circumflex DougEwell2
- Re: [OT] o-circumflex Asmus Freytag
- RE: [OT] o-circumflex Carl W. Brown
- RE: [OT] o-circumflex Jonathan Rosenne
- Re: [OT] o-circumflex Lars Marius Garshol