Mailing-List: contact lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Lucene Developers List" <lucene-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
To: lucene-dev@jakarta.apache.org
From: "Christoph Kiehl" <ck@sulu3000.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Refactoring QueryParser.jj, setLowercaseWildcardTerms()
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 13:35:44 +0100
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <b2g3gs$3r9$1@main.gmane.org>
References: <b2ble7$cp3$1@main.gmane.org> <3E4A8425.6050602@lucene.com>
 <b2e499$bbg$1@main.gmane.org> <200302121843.43835.tatu@hypermall.net>
 <049d01c2d32d$366716f0$0200a8c0@whale>
Sender: news <news@main.gmane.org>

maurits van wijland wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Maybe it we should start using stemming in a different maner. Look at
> it from the perspective
> of queryexpansion. In case we store stems in a different table, we
> will not have this problem!
>
> So, each token in stored in the index as a term.
> Each term is stemmed with the appropriate stemmer
> Store each stem and unstemed term in a separate index.
>
> We could then, search using the terms entered, and firstfind all the
> terms that match the WildcardQuery. Next,you coulde use the terms
> found, and then stem them.
> From there, you retrieve all the terms related to that stem!
> Finally, search for documents with all terms retrieved.

This, might be an idea. But it would slow down everything by factor 3 if I
understand you correctly.

This problem is more complicated then I thought first. Hm, are we really the
first people on earth facing this problem? There must be a common way
solving this ;)
I tried to find out how google handles wildcard, but they seem to be
ignored.

Thoughtfully
Christoph


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org