Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 78011 invoked from network); 29 Mar 2011 14:55:20 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 29 Mar 2011 14:55:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 592 invoked by uid 500); 29 Mar 2011 14:55:19 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 538 invoked by uid 500); 29 Mar 2011 14:55:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 531 invoked by uid 99); 29 Mar 2011 14:55:19 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 14:55:19 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of yseeley@gmail.com designates 209.85.161.48 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.161.48] (HELO mail-fx0-f48.google.com) (209.85.161.48) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 14:55:14 +0000 Received: by fxm7 with SMTP id 7so390978fxm.35 for ; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 07:54:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:reply-to:in-reply-to :references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type; bh=bydkNyi5DdZYQa3/87v/3YWGksXDph8OKy5L1gnlgx8=; b=RhCetYsxk4YC4sAVzHZZDH3D2Ykfvta+Jacn0Kkdb04xUGUaLr+9UTZu+uOBPfjG8Y 9uAbbRTitKmYAMzBv9K8xbXXd+pXi/NYZ7jXlqYrh68okS0lyDjO7G5vRSui20pGcm3w lyT5OGfYaUZLfNYsZ5vzfaYHpBBjqFMNtpzwk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; b=nuu5EIZExi870SPo/s+gFsBacj0yi1C9hOw2a5P9dOjntTq8ckwVVDn8nBFkAPIcT1 AfMWu4ZaVnURdvTjiD1dVx5omcl85p67qebS4ewMfNFqLWEou7n6NBAgeqoRurpHtYa1 jFRDQcjpWRyxEHuf2UQ1ME2QJl3DQeYh+Gf4Q= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.125.196 with SMTP id z4mr672986far.28.1301410492256; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 07:54:52 -0700 (PDT) Sender: yseeley@gmail.com Reply-To: yonik@lucidimagination.com Received: by 10.223.111.79 with HTTP; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 07:54:52 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <549361831.13318.1301113506431.JavaMail.tomcat@hel.zones.apache.org> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 10:54:52 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: PI4ut8XTYBYuH7wh7dqCBLKlcvg Message-ID: Subject: Re: [jira] [Commented] (SOLR-2417) Allow explain info directly to response documents From: Yonik Seeley To: dev@lucene.apache.org Cc: Ryan McKinley Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 10:44 AM, Ryan McKinley wrote: > more complex details would be handled via standard parameters -- for > highlighting, we would use the existing parameters to setup the > highlighter. > > fl=id,[hl:title],[hl:body]&hl.fragsize=100 > > We could even use the standard per-field stuff: > > fl=id,[hl:title],[hl:body]&hl.fragsize=100&f.title.fragsize=50 If we're still going to make such extensive use of the existing parameters (which makes sense), then wouldn't a simple "hl.inline=true" (or something like that) make sense? -Yonik http://www.lucenerevolution.org -- Lucene/Solr User Conference, May 25-26, San Francisco --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org