Mailing-List: contact solr-dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: solr-dev@lucene.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy)
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 17:24:02 -0800 (PST)
From: Chris Hostetter <hossman_lucene@fucit.org>
To: solr-dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: SOLR-1131 - Multiple Fields per Field Type
In-Reply-To: <850142FF-9599-4AE7-8BE8-BA8A66686C1E@apache.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0911251702450.6754@radix.cryptio.net>
References: <850142FF-9599-4AE7-8BE8-BA8A66686C1E@apache.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII


I'm having a hard time wrapping my head arround this entire concept ... i 
know part of my problem is that your example use case seems somewhat 
nonsensical...

: As a simple proof of concept, imagine that I define a new FieldType 
: called PlusMinusIntFieldType that extends IntField.  This FieldType 
: takes in an int value and outputs two Fields: one with the original 
: value and one with the negative of the value.
	...

: OK, on the search side is where it gets tricky.  The whole point of this 
: exercise is that the details are hidden from the user in the generic 
: case.  Thus, a query of plusMinus:5 should automatically expand to 
: (plusMinus__0:5 OR plusMinus__1:-5).  Of course, an expert user should 

...nothing could match plusMinus__0:5 that didn't also match 
plusMinus__1:-5, so i don't really understand what the point of using the 
field expansion for a use case like this would be ... and that's making it 
hard for me to try and understand how this sort of system 
could/should/would be used at query time.

perhaps a more realistic example would be helpful?

...or even some differnet simple and contrived examples that demonstrate 
how this could be usefull in a way that isn't possible with a single 
field.

	?

-Hoss