On 22 Sep 2000, at 6:19, Bill Moseley wrote:
> At 01:40 AM 09/22/00 -0700, email@example.com wrote:
> >If you do not like this message, we can do two things:
> >1- Preserve the search string in the search function of swish-e and
> >show the original one. Anyway, at this moment the original string is
> >never written because the stopwords are removed from the query.
> No, I depend on Swish returning the search string: The # Search words:
> header returns the search words converted into "swish words" which means to
> me that it's been split by Wordcharacters, IgnoreFirst and IgnoreLast
> characters have been removed, and stop words have been removed. I use that
> returned string for highlighting the words in the source text.
> With phrase searches it's a slightly different story as I now need to know
> what all the stop words are, so I can ignore them in my source text when
> looking for phrases to highlight.
> >2- Since your cgi script has the original search string, you can use
> I can, it just means I need to know Wordcharacters, IgnorFirst and Last,
> and the Stop words to convert string of words into "swish words" and that I
> do it exactly like swish does during indexing.
> Or a third option, which is what I'm currently doing:
> 3) Ignore the second # Search words: header.
> Summary: To be truly accurate, # Search words: should be displayed for each
> index with that index's settings taken into consideration since each index
> can have different stopwords and Wordcharacters and Ignore settings.
> But searching indexes with different indexing settings will generate
> confusing results.
You are right. Searching several indexes can give you different
search strings!! And metaNames cannot match!!
BTW, I am trying to unify all results when searching in several
indexes, as you posted previously. Let me think about it...
Received on Fri Sep 22 14:34:23 2000