Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 55974 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2009 23:53:22 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 30 Oct 2009 23:53:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 2442 invoked by uid 500); 30 Oct 2009 23:53:22 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 2355 invoked by uid 500); 30 Oct 2009 23:53:21 -0000 Mailing-List: contact java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list java-dev@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 2347 invoked by uid 99); 30 Oct 2009 23:53:21 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 30 Oct 2009 23:53:21 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-10.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [140.211.11.140] (HELO brutus.apache.org) (140.211.11.140) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 30 Oct 2009 23:53:19 +0000 Received: from brutus (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by brutus.apache.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A8B5234C045 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 2009 16:52:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <618221601.1256946779356.JavaMail.jira@brutus> Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 23:52:59 +0000 (UTC) From: "Steven Rowe (JIRA)" To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: [jira] Commented: (LUCENE-2019) map unicode process-internal codepoints to replacement character In-Reply-To: <1105014567.1256840399442.JavaMail.jira@brutus> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2019?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12772184#action_12772184 ] Steven Rowe commented on LUCENE-2019: ------------------------------------- bq. by disallowing all noncharacters as term text, lucene is *more free* to use them as delimiters, and sentinel values, and such, as specified in chapter 3 of the standard. Lucene is more free, but Lucene's users are not. Quite the contrary. IMHO, Lucene's users (applications that incorporate the Lucene library) should be able to use Unicode data in ways that the standard allows ("Applications are free to use any of these noncharacter code points internally"). U+FFFF was chosen for Lucene-internal use for reasons very similar to those you're bringing up, Robert: something like "who would ever want to use non-characters in an index?" However, this choice does not obligate Lucene to take the same action for all other non-characters. I think the fix here is documentation, not proscription. > map unicode process-internal codepoints to replacement character > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: LUCENE-2019 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2019 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: Index > Reporter: Robert Muir > Priority: Minor > Attachments: LUCENE-2019.patch > > > A spinoff from LUCENE-2016. > There are several process-internal codepoints in unicode, we should not store these in the index. > Instead they should be mapped to replacement character (U+FFFD), so they can be used process-internally. > An example of this is how Lucene Java currently uses U+FFFF process-internally, it can't be in the index or will cause problems. -- 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: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org