On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 7:11 AM, Chris Harris <rygu...@gmail.com> wrote: > but also crazier ones, perhaps like > > agreement w/5 (medical and companion) > (dog or dragon) w/5 (cat and cow) > (daisy and (dog or dragon)) w/25 (cat not cow) [skip]
Everything in your post matches our experience. We ended up writing something which transforms the query as well but had to give up on certain crazy things people tried, such as this form: (A and B) w/5 (C and D) For this one: A w/5 (B and C) We found the user expected the same A to be within 5 terms of both a B and a C, and rewrote it to match that but also match more than they asked for. So far, there have been no complaints about the overmatches (it's documented.) There is probably an extremely accurate way to rewrite it, but it couldn't be figured out at the time. Maybe start with spans for A and then remove spans not-near a B and spans not-near a C, which would leave you with only spans near an A. The problem is that if you expand the query to something like this, it gets quite a bit more complex, so a user query which is already complex could turn into a really hard to understand mess... TX --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org
