The search on your demo orders results only in the alphabetical order of categories to which the links belong, and not puttin the most relevant links first. Like this:
A/B/C
Link 1.
A/B/D
Link 2.
A/E/F
Link 3.
So that Link 1 appears before Link 2 only because the cateogyr A/B/C is "alphabetically" higher than A/B/D. Although it may well be that Link 2 is more relevant than Link 1 (the searched term is found more often in the title/description/keyword of that link).
This was one of the most inconvenient features of Links (non-SQL) - we've played with it but found no way to remedy it.
I HAVE seen sites running Links SQL 2 placing the best results first. Question. Did you simply prefer running the demo in such an unnatural way (search results relevancy is to me most important in evaluating a search system), or did those sites actually "tweak" the search beyond its standard abilities?
A/B/C
Link 1.
A/B/D
Link 2.
A/E/F
Link 3.
So that Link 1 appears before Link 2 only because the cateogyr A/B/C is "alphabetically" higher than A/B/D. Although it may well be that Link 2 is more relevant than Link 1 (the searched term is found more often in the title/description/keyword of that link).
This was one of the most inconvenient features of Links (non-SQL) - we've played with it but found no way to remedy it.
I HAVE seen sites running Links SQL 2 placing the best results first. Question. Did you simply prefer running the demo in such an unnatural way (search results relevancy is to me most important in evaluating a search system), or did those sites actually "tweak" the search beyond its standard abilities?