<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Getting started with Lucene 2.0 â€“ A powerful java search engine</title>
	<atom:link href="http://technology.amis.nl/2006/07/23/getting-started-with-lucene-20-a-powerful-java-search-engine/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://technology.amis.nl/2006/07/23/getting-started-with-lucene-20-a-powerful-java-search-engine/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=getting-started-with-lucene-20-a-powerful-java-search-engine</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Apr 2013 10:04:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Leigh</title>
		<link>http://technology.amis.nl/2006/07/23/getting-started-with-lucene-20-a-powerful-java-search-engine/#comment-3711</link>
		<dc:creator>Leigh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:02:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://technology.amis.nl/blog/?p=1288#comment-3711</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In the code section where you are creating the index, you left out the step where you add the document to the IndexModifier. Should be: im.addDoc(d);

Great intro to Lucene 2.2.0. Thanks!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In the code section where you are creating the index, you left out the step where you add the document to the IndexModifier. Should be: im.addDoc(d);</p>
<p>Great intro to Lucene 2.2.0. Thanks!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Abin Thomas</title>
		<link>http://technology.amis.nl/2006/07/23/getting-started-with-lucene-20-a-powerful-java-search-engine/#comment-3710</link>
		<dc:creator>Abin Thomas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jul 2007 09:48:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://technology.amis.nl/blog/?p=1288#comment-3710</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Very nicely written... Thanks a lot!!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very nicely written&#8230; Thanks a lot!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeroen van Wilgenburg</title>
		<link>http://technology.amis.nl/2006/07/23/getting-started-with-lucene-20-a-powerful-java-search-engine/#comment-3709</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeroen van Wilgenburg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Jul 2006 09:03:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://technology.amis.nl/blog/?p=1288#comment-3709</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thanks for pointing the AND thing out, I have changed it. I once made a very stupid typo in a query in google and it still returned results, so I assumed it was OR search. But apperently the typo wasn&#039;t that stupid.

What you can do for implicit AND-search is put a + before every search term if there isn&#039;t a - or a + yet. Lucene rewrites the query internally to the +/- format (so pulp AND fiction becomes +pulp +fiction internally), the query object you get after invoking queryParser.parse() displays the rewritten query (it&#039;s just the toString method). You can see the rewrtitten query in Luke just under the search box. And then you have to built in a check to see whether a user used OR in his original query. I think this is all that needs to be done, I might have overlooked something.

I have to check if it can be done via some setting, but as far as I can remember it isn&#039;t possible.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for pointing the AND thing out, I have changed it. I once made a very stupid typo in a query in google and it still returned results, so I assumed it was OR search. But apperently the typo wasn&#8217;t that stupid.</p>
<p>What you can do for implicit AND-search is put a + before every search term if there isn&#8217;t a &#8211; or a + yet. Lucene rewrites the query internally to the +/- format (so pulp AND fiction becomes +pulp +fiction internally), the query object you get after invoking queryParser.parse() displays the rewritten query (it&#8217;s just the toString method). You can see the rewrtitten query in Luke just under the search box. And then you have to built in a check to see whether a user used OR in his original query. I think this is all that needs to be done, I might have overlooked something.</p>
<p>I have to check if it can be done via some setting, but as far as I can remember it isn&#8217;t possible.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alper</title>
		<link>http://technology.amis.nl/2006/07/23/getting-started-with-lucene-20-a-powerful-java-search-engine/#comment-3708</link>
		<dc:creator>Alper</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Jul 2006 00:08:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://technology.amis.nl/blog/?p=1288#comment-3708</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From experience I know search based on OR is completely useless.

Google does not OR their searches -as you say- AND is implicit. From the Google website: &quot;The &quot;AND&quot; operator is unnecessary -- we include all search terms by default.&quot;

Is it possible to make Lucene see AND as implicit? Do you have to rewrite the query parser or is there a setting you can set?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>From experience I know search based on OR is completely useless.</p>
<p>Google does not OR their searches -as you say- AND is implicit. From the Google website: &#8220;The &#8220;AND&#8221; operator is unnecessary &#8212; we include all search terms by default.&#8221;</p>
<p>Is it possible to make Lucene see AND as implicit? Do you have to rewrite the query parser or is there a setting you can set?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
