> I have been having fun with KinoSearch (an open source indexer/search
> engine with a Perl API), and I have documented my experiences here:
>
>    http://dewey.library.nd.edu/morgan/kinosearch/?cmd=about
>
> Cool!
>
> --
> Eric Lease Morgan

I'm taking a break from evaluating search engines to respond to this. I'm
glad Eric took a look at this SE, and I appreciate this documentation. But I
have to take issue with his labeling spell-check and synonym support as
"featuritis." These are fundamental capabilities not so much "increasingly
desired by users" but expected functionalities for search. The fielded
search issues intrigued me, not because users do a lot of fielded searching
(they don't), but because it reminded me that Kino doesn't support any
faceting, either.

As Eric notes, he would need to build in a spell-checker (and the ability to
build a dictionary from his index). He didn't bring up stemming or light
pluralization, but that would be yet another important capability. Then
there's the issue of weighting fields. Then there's search log reporting. I
could go on... but a search engine capable of supporting modern
functionalities doesn't equate to a product larded with "featuritis." And if
you say "but it's free" I'll scream...

I agree on the indexing and Unicode issues with swish-e, which we will be
migrating from shortly for a number of reasons. I also like Eric's idea of
attaching search software to a major project. A search engine that had the
collective strength and wisdom of LAMP software could be an interesting
alternative to... *you know who.*

Sorry if I overreacted to the "featuritis" comment--I live and die by search
these days... I've already had to explain to more than one stakeholder why
we can't just use Jimbob's Crapola Indexer or whatever.

K.G. Schneider
[log in to unmask]