Re: Use of "token" vs "lexeme" in text search documentation
От | Oleg Bartunov |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Use of "token" vs "lexeme" in text search documentation |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.LNX.4.64.0710162003020.25678@sn.sai.msu.ru обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Use of "token" vs "lexeme" in text search documentation (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-docs |
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007, Tom Lane wrote: > The current documentation seems a bit inconsistent in its use of the > terms "token" and "lexeme". The majority of the text seems to use > "lexeme" exclusively, which is inconsistent with the fact that the > term "token" is exposed by ts_token_type() and friends. But there > are a few places that seem to use "lexeme" to mean something returned > by a dictionary. > > I was considering trying to adopt these conventions: > > * What a parser returns is a "token". > > * When a dictionary recognizes a token, what it returns is a "lexeme". > > This would make the phrase "normalized lexeme" redundant, since we > don't call it a lexeme at all unless it's been normalized. > > Comments? Hmm, you say what I always thought. I'd be happy if you stress this in docs. > > regards, tom lane > Regards, Oleg _____________________________________________________________ Oleg Bartunov, Research Scientist, Head of AstroNet (www.astronet.ru), Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University, Russia Internet: oleg@sai.msu.su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/ phone: +007(495)939-16-83, +007(495)939-23-83
В списке pgsql-docs по дате отправления: