Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-lucy-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-lucy-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 31C368C32 for ; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 18:39:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 8419 invoked by uid 500); 30 Aug 2011 18:39:28 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-lucy-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 8116 invoked by uid 500); 30 Aug 2011 18:39:27 -0000 Mailing-List: contact lucy-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: lucy-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list lucy-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 8108 invoked by uid 99); 30 Aug 2011 18:39:27 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 18:39:27 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [76.96.30.80] (HELO qmta08.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net) (76.96.30.80) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 18:39:19 +0000 Received: from omta12.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.44]) by qmta08.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id Sien1h0060x6nqcA8iergw; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 18:38:52 +0000 Received: from pekmac.local ([209.98.116.241]) by omta12.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id Sieb1h00R5CaL8p8Yiee0X; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 18:38:43 +0000 Message-ID: <4E5D2E2F.70006@peknet.com> Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2011 13:38:39 -0500 From: Peter Karman Reply-To: peter@peknet.com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110616 Thunderbird/3.1.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lucy-dev@incubator.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [lucy-dev] which fields contained which terms Per the thread here from Feb 2011[0] I am want to make it easy to discover why a document matched a given query, i.e. which terms matched in which fields. Marvin and I have chatted about this a few different times on #lucy_dev, and it's clear to me now why it is problematic to do this kind of data gathering in the existing Matcher/Collector architecture. Post-processing provides a cleaner way into the solution, provided we can do it without sacrificing performance. I wanted to get this thread on to the -dev list as we need to sort out if/how the index structure might change to make this feature possible. Thoughts? [0] http://s.apache.org/fz -- Peter Karman . http://peknet.com/ . peter@peknet.com