lucene-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Grant Ingersoll <gsing...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [spatial] Cartesian "Tiers" nomenclature
Date Mon, 28 Dec 2009 18:09:28 GMT

On Dec 28, 2009, at 1:00 PM, Ryan McKinley wrote:

>>> 
>>>> Do you think it is worth a name change?  This is about to get baked into
>>>> Solr and I would really prefer we choose names that the rest of the world
>>>> seems to understand.
>>> 
>>> If it hasn't been baked in yet, then +1.  I do agree that it's important to
>>> use names that are already present in the hivemind rather than invent new
>>> ones.  Been there, done that, got sick of having to explain myself, went back
>>> to popular names...
>>> 
>> 
>> It's semi-baked into Lucene already and people familiar w/ LocalLucene and LocalSolr.
>> 
> 
> Although it is 'semi-baked', the spatial contrib in 2.9 is clearly marked experimental
and subject to change.  Also, the tier stuff in 2.9 does not have enough substance to stand
on its own -- any change will break APIs.
> 
> If folks think "tile" (or "grid") make more sense, now is an easy time to change.
> 
> In my book it seems better to use the most common terms, but I can also see the advantage
to knowing that if people are talking about "cartesian tiers" then they are referring to lucene.
 (That can also be useful to distinguish spatial lucene/solr from "LocalLucene/Solr")
> 
> I'm +1 for "Tile"

Ditto.  I'm +1 on tiles.
Mime
View raw message