Hi Scott,

I think this sounds reasonable, but why not also add LATIN_EXTENDED_B and LATIN_EXTENDED_ADDITIONAL? AFAICT, among other things, these cover some eastern European languages and Vietnamese, respectively.

On 07/18/2008 at 5:03 PM, Scott Smith wrote:
org.apache.lucene.analysis.cjk.CJKTokenizer is in the
"contrib" portion of lucene, so I'm not sure if this is the
right place to mention this or not. I was doing some
detailed analysis of how this tokenizer worked and noticed
the following behavior (which I would classify as a bug).

If you pass the word "construccion" to the tokenizer, it returns a
single token: "construccion". That seems correct. If you pass the word
"construcción" to this tokenizer, it will generate three tokens:
"construcci", "ó", and "n". This is happens because the accented "o" is
not treated as a Latin-1 character. Splitting the word seems like a bug
and violates the "does a decent job for most European languages"

The fix seems straight forward. I replaced the following 2
lines (in the CJKTokenizer class):

if ((ub == Character.UnicodeBlock.BASIC_LATIN)
(ub == Character.UnicodeBlock.HALFWIDTH_AND_FULLWIDTH_FORMS))

if ((ub == Character.UnicodeBlock.BASIC_LATIN) // chars 0x00-0x7f
(ub == Character.UnicodeBlock.LATIN_1_SUPPLEMENT) // char 0x80-0xff
(ub == Character.UnicodeBlock.LATIN_EXTENDED_A) // char 0x100-0x17f
(ub == Character.UnicodeBlock.HALFWIDTH_AND_FULLWIDTH_FORMS))
Am I missing something or does this seem like a reasonable
thing to want to do?
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org

Search Discussions

Discussion Posts


Follow ups

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
posts ‹ prev | 2 of 3 | next ›
Discussion Overview
groupjava-user @
postedJul 18, '08 at 9:04p
activeJul 18, '08 at 9:48p

2 users in discussion

Scott Smith: 2 posts Steven A Rowe: 1 post



site design / logo © 2022 Grokbase