oups .. 2- According to the table , a new Query is created with just non zero boost search field search2:coco^search2_boost search4:coco^search4_boost
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 18:53:41 +0100, Nicolas Maisonneuve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > hmm a idea would be to create dynamically a boost table (field, > boostvalue) in a extended version of a TermQuery depending on the > field: > ex: StructuredTermQuery ("search2", "coco") > > 1-> Update a boost table according to: > > * the virtual structure : > > > -structured index > > search1 > > search2 > > search4 > > search3 > > search5 > > * the fact the score is decrease with the dept : > > * the search field argument, here "search2" > > So for this exemple the table would be = (search1_boost=0, > search2_boost=1, search3_boost=0, search4_boost=0.7) > > 2- According to the table , a new Query is created with just non zero > boost search field search2:coco^search1_boost > search4:coco^search2_boost > > WDYT ? > > other proposals more flexible, clever, faster ? > > nicolas maisonneuve > > On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 18:29:12 +0100, Nicolas Maisonneuve > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > hy everybody, > > > > I would like use a index with structured search field. > > > > - flat index (lucene type) > > searchfield1 > > searchfield2 > > searchffield3 > > ... > > > > > to allow simple extensions of some search features: > > - the query TermQuery("search2", "coco" ) search in search2 and > > search4 fields, > > - The score depend of the depth where the word is found : A document > > where "coco" is found in search4 field has a score lower than a > > document with "coco" found in search2 > > > > How {do with,hack} lucene to integrated easily this notion of > > structured field ? (no fuzzy methods allow because of the > > performance) ? > > > > thanks in advance, > > > > Nicolas Maisonneuve > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]