The i-proving search

Hierarchies are highly overrated

One of the things I like about i-proving is that I don’t have to think too hard about where to put a post because it really doesn’t matter. The important thing is to be able to find the information later. (Issues of public vs. private posts aside) Some might say that I’m being lazy, if I was just more analytically rigorous, then I would be able to figure out THE right place to place my post in the hierarchy of snips. I say hogwash, as far as I’m concerned the relevance of any given post depends on the context and a hierarchy is only suitable for organizing information when viewed in a single context.

What is important, is to be able to locate information independent of context, e.g. Google.

Search and ye shall find

Which brings me to the other thing I like about i-proving – the i-proving search.

The i-proving search is based on Apache Lucene , an open source java full-featured text search engine library. Comprehensive documentation of Lucene query syntaxt can be found here

The ‘+’ is your friend

Maybe it’s just me but I’ve never used the ‘+’ operator when searching Google, but Google always seems to find what I would expect.

Unfortunately the i-proving search, at least and/or until we change it (the power of java open source) needs the ‘+’.

It appears that an i-proving query containing two distinct words (not enclosed in quotes, i.e. not a phrase) will result in a match result list ranked by the total occurrence count of both words – the top matches may not contain one of the words you entered. If a word must be contained in a matching post you need to prefix the word with the ‘+’ symbol.

It's only fair to share...
Share on FacebookGoogle+Tweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedIn

Leave a Reply