@@ -70,9 +70,9 @@ GET my-index-000001/_search
7070
7171It's possible for conflicting names to arise, for fields that are defined within different scopes:
7272
73- 1 . A pass-through object is defined next to a field that has the same name as one of the pass-through object
74- sub-fields, e.g.
75-
73+ a . A pass-through object is defined next to a field that has the same name as one of the pass-through object
74+ sub-fields, e.g.
75+ +
7676[source,console]
7777--------------------------------------------------
7878PUT my-index-000001/_doc/1
@@ -83,12 +83,12 @@ PUT my-index-000001/_doc/1
8383 "id": "bar"
8484}
8585--------------------------------------------------
86+ +
87+ In this case, references to `id` point to the field at the root level, while field `attributes.id`
88+ can only be accessed using the full path.
8689
87- In this case, references to `id` point to the field at the root level, while field `attributes.id`
88- can only be accessed using the full path.
89-
90- 1. Two (or more) pass-through objects are defined within the same object and contain fields with the same name, e.g.
91-
90+ b. Two (or more) pass-through objects are defined within the same object and contain fields with the same name, e.g.
91+ +
9292[source,console]
9393--------------------------------------------------
9494PUT my-index-000002
@@ -117,7 +117,7 @@ PUT my-index-000002
117117 }
118118}
119119--------------------------------------------------
120-
120+ +
121121In this case, param `priority` is used for conflict resolution, with the higher values taking precedence. In the
122122example above, `resource.attributes` has higher priority than `attributes`, so references to `id` point to the field
123123within `resource.attributes`. `attributes.id` can still be accessed using its full path.
0 commit comments