You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Nov 9, 2022. It is now read-only.
Fuzzy matching (e.g. double-metaphone) should dynamically generate dictionaries because the domain for a given match element is the values of the element in the system at the start of matching. This currently does not seem to be working.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
@anthony-gray Are you using this library independently or as an incorporated part of Data Hub 5? There was a method that allowed would create a dictionary if it didn't exist and there was a range index on the field, as part of storing options.
This logic isn't called as part of Data Hub 5, as the options are stored differently. A dictionary can be generated using cts.values on a range index and passing those values into spell.makeDictionary. (https://docs.marklogic.com/spell.makeDictionary)
I’m using it independently. I do not intend to use DHF. Matching should do this automatically by default because this should be the most common use case in the context of matching documents in a particular database using fields of documents in that database. Passing/supplying a dictionary should be optional. I should not have to call a method to generate a dictionary. All I should have to do is specify in the match configuration the arguments for fuzzy matching and it should just work. If there is a configuration option that toggles dictionary generation please let me know.
In version 1.3.1. dictionaries that don't already exist will be created from indexes that are associated with a property if a cts:reference is provided.
Fuzzy matching (e.g. double-metaphone) should dynamically generate dictionaries because the domain for a given match element is the values of the element in the system at the start of matching. This currently does not seem to be working.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: