lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jack Krupansky" <j...@basetechnology.com>
Subject Re: Spatial field names in Solr
Date Tue, 18 Sep 2012 23:02:05 GMT
How might an "average user" approach using spatial. In other words, what 
real world issues and constraints would they be using as guides to sift 
through these features? I mean, if there is no transparently obvious model 
to guide average users, you might as well call the field types 
"spatial_alpha", "spatial_beta", etc. and users can use folklore and trial 
and error to decide which types to use, and the full, detailed names need 
only appear in the field type class attributes.

Is there an updated wiki I can look at to understand this stuff a little 
better?

-- Jack Krupansky

-----Original Message----- 
From: Smiley, David W.
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 5:55 PM
To: dev@lucene.apache.org Dev
Subject: Spatial field names in Solr

This past Sunday I added 3 spatial field types to Solr in SOLR-3304: 
SpatialTwoDoublesFieldType, SpatialRecursivePrefixTreeFieldType and 
SpatialTermQueryPrefixTreeFieldType.  Eventually there will also be a 
SpatialBBoxFieldType following this naming convention.  These are named in a 
consistent way based on SpatialStrategy subclasses in the Lucene spatial 
module.   Of course, Solr 3 introduced PointType and LatLonType.

What do people think of these Solr field type names?  They are kind of long; 
perhaps the "Field" parts can be removed.  Maybe "L4" should precede each of 
these names? (a Lucene 4 spatial module reference).  It would further 
delineate these fields from the Solr native fields.

And about TwoDoubles in particular... I had a tough time coming up with a 
name for that in the first place as I wanted to avoid a LatLon variation in 
its name as I think that's a bad idea. For whatever reason I didn't simply 
choose Point.  I opened LUCENE-4374 to rename this SpatialStrategy subclass, 
suggesting PointVectorStrategy.  But maybe PointStrategy is fine.  Ideally 
the name suggests something about its implementation since there very well 
may be alternative indexing strategies in the future for a given type.

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


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


Mime
View raw message