[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2167?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12929372#action_12929372
 ] 

Steven Rowe commented on LUCENE-2167:
-------------------------------------

bq. I just tend to really like plain old "uax#29" as a default [...] i would 
prefer if we tried to keep the complexity down

So we're talking about two separate issues here: a) Lucene's default behavior; 
and b) Lucene's capabilities. 

For a), you'll have a lot of 'splaining to do if you drop existing 
functionality (e.g. email and hostname "recognition" -- where quotes indicate 
"bad" things, right? "Cool"!)

For b), you appear to agree with Marvin Humphries about keeping the product 
lean and mean: complexity (a.k.a. functionality beyond the default) is bad 
because it creates maintenance problems.

bq. we should try to not make analysis the "wonder-do-it-all" machine.

Why not?  Why shouldn't Lucene be a catch-*all* for "cool" linguistic stuff?


> Implement StandardTokenizer with the UAX#29 Standard
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-2167
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2167
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>          Components: contrib/analyzers
>    Affects Versions: 3.1, 4.0
>            Reporter: Shyamal Prasad
>            Assignee: Steven Rowe
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 3.1, 4.0
>
>         Attachments: LUCENE-2167-jflex-tld-macro-gen.patch, 
> LUCENE-2167-jflex-tld-macro-gen.patch, LUCENE-2167-jflex-tld-macro-gen.patch, 
> LUCENE-2167-lucene-buildhelper-maven-plugin.patch, 
> LUCENE-2167.benchmark.patch, LUCENE-2167.benchmark.patch, 
> LUCENE-2167.benchmark.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch, 
> LUCENE-2167.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch, 
> LUCENE-2167.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch, 
> LUCENE-2167.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch, 
> LUCENE-2167.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch, 
> LUCENE-2167.patch, standard.zip, StandardTokenizerImpl.jflex
>
>   Original Estimate: 0.5h
>  Remaining Estimate: 0.5h
>
> It would be really nice for StandardTokenizer to adhere straight to the 
> standard as much as we can with jflex. Then its name would actually make 
> sense.
> Such a transition would involve renaming the old StandardTokenizer to 
> EuropeanTokenizer, as its javadoc claims:
> bq. This should be a good tokenizer for most European-language documents
> The new StandardTokenizer could then say
> bq. This should be a good tokenizer for most languages.
> All the english/euro-centric stuff like the acronym/company/apostrophe stuff 
> can stay with that EuropeanTokenizer, and it could be used by the european 
> analyzers.

-- 
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: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to