incubator-bloodhound-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Koželj <pe...@digiverse.si>
Subject Re: Improved Search Architecture - Quick Search Box (Was: Re: [Apache Bloodhound] Proposals/BEP-0004 added)
Date Thu, 22 Nov 2012 17:08:28 GMT
As I understood the BEP the syntax itself is TBD and totally open at the
moment.
I would actually prefere if we define the syntax in a subpage and use one
of the standards grammars to define it.


On 22 November 2012 16:59, Gary Martin <gary.martin@wandisco.com> wrote:

> On 22/11/12 14:20, Andrej Golcov wrote:
>
>> On a technical note, is there any reason to specify text~= for a general
>>>
>> text query? I would have
>>
>>> thought that we could distinguish free text (as perhaps suggested below
>>>
>> in the examples below.)
>> Agreed and fixed the BEP accordingly.
>>
>
> I was hoping for a bit of a discussion around this point actually. I was
> wondering whether I had missed some occasions where there is a requirement
> for the ability to avoid ambiguity. In the end there is always quoting and
> there should be a bracket notation so there may be no requirement for
> text~= at all.
>
> We will of course also require the ability to escape quoting and other
> control characters within any new query language.
>
> I would if there is much support for defining query languages any of the
> suggested search backends.
>
> Cheers,
>     Gary
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message