lucene-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Otis Gospodnetic <otis_gospodne...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: "did you mean" for multi-word queries implementation
Date Thu, 22 Feb 2007 18:22:31 GMT
I believe it's a SpellChecker implementation deficiency, and Karl will probably suggest looking
at LUCENE-626 as an alternative.  And I'll ask you to please report back how much better than
the contrib SpellChecker Karl's solution is.

Otis
 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Simpy -- http://www.simpy.com/  -  Tag  -  Search  -  Share

----- Original Message ----
From: Felix Litman <f_litman@pacbell.net>
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 1:19:26 PM
Subject: "did you mean" for multi-word queries implementation

Did any one have success implementing "did you mean" feature for multi-word queries as described
in Tom White's excellent "Did you Mean Lucene?" article?

 http://today.java.net/pub/a/today/2005/08/09/didyoumean.html

...and more specifically, using the CompositeDidYouMeanParser implementation as described
in "Supporting Composite Queries" section of the article?

We are not able so far to get good "suggestions" to multi-word queries using this approach,
so we are trying to determine if it is a Lucene issue, or our implementation...

Thank you,
Felix




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


Mime
View raw message