+1 on reviewing existing features. That it is standard does not mean that it works, and it's nice to be able to pass results back upstream.
On 6 November 2015 at 03:41, David Causse dcausse@wikimedia.org wrote:
Le 05/11/2015 22:56, Erik Bernhardson a écrit :
I really want to see us focus on fixing what we already have and validating the features we already support before we go whole hog on incorperating all kinds of new data.
Hi,
I totally agree, there's some existing features that need to be reviewed, tuned or rewritten. Some queries give better results if disabled:
- kennedy[1] with default features enable does not bring JFK in the first
page
- kennedy[2] with some features disabled (all fields, boost links) brings
JFK in the top 3
Working without a relevancy lab will always lead to discrepancies like that, the developer will focus on a limited set of 4/5 queries to develop the feature with a high risk to break previous features. I'd really like to use the relevancy lab to review existing features.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&profile=defa... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&profile=defa...
discovery mailing list discovery@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/discovery