UniverseUniversity


Home Projects Jobs Clientele Contact

uu


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: keywords



I'd love to have some smart way to structure keyword list, weigh keywords and so forth in order to optimize searching. Although it is not urgent we have to think about it... Or we can just attach google search to uu and tune up our keyword ideology accordingly?..

Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh wrote:
Are there any plans on weighting the keywords?

Alexey Parshin wrote:
Here are my conclusions:

1) It is author's duty to maintain these keywords especially if object
has multiple versions. As far as I understand, the small number of
keywords isn't sufficient, and the large number is impossible to
maintain.
2) If the keywords are not taken from the text or something displayed
along with the text - they don't associate with the object as possible
search conditions.

Conclusions:
1) We don't need an artificial set of keywords that are not a part of
the object.
2) Keywords should be generated automatically from the object text.
3) If author needs something that associates an object or its part
with keywords, the author should provide a short description of the
object or its part in the object text.
4) Auto-generation should happen automatically after any object
content modification. Keywords themselves are not humanly editable.

If we implement keywords this way, it would be zero efforts to
maintain these keywords, and no logical inconsistencies when a set of
keywords doesn't match the object content.

2006/11/15, sergey@total-knowledge.com
<mailto:sergey@total-knowledge.com> <sergey@total-knowledge.com
<mailto:sergey@total-knowledge.com>>:


    > 5. What if UU creates its own keyword list, asks the author to
    edit it
    > and does not let it go, until the author adds at least one word not
    > listed?
    >
    > 6. Shouldn't the keyword list to be structured in some way?
    >
    > 7. How keyword lists are updated? Depending on events in each
    category
    > the UMO belongs to? This does bring in the idea of structured
    keyword
    > list.

    Regarding structuring.

    1. Automaticaly generated keywords for the current UMO.
    2. All "current UMO"'s children UMOs keywords(if any)
    3. Author's custom keywords(if any)

    From UI point of view, all keywords will be displayed in the same text
    area Keywords.
    From DB point of view, it's up to Alexey to deside. Here is my humble
    opinion:
    We may add keywords field to every *_content table where we may store
    author's custom keywords, automaticaly generated keywords will be
    stored
    in keywords_list table. This will allow keywords to be part of the
    UMO
    versioning.



    > --
    >
    > Anatoly Volynets, Co-Founder
    > total-knowledge.com <http://total-knowledge.com>
    > culturedialogue.org <http://culturedialogue.org>
    >
    >





--
Alexey Parshin,
http://www.sptk.net


--

Anatoly Volynets, Co-Founder
total-knowledge.com
culturedialogue.org


Authoright © Total Knowledge: 2001-2008