Replying to Mike's post - there might be some interesting work being done here: http://structuredblogging.org/index.php
And the interest is that it seems to be an effort to cluster content around consensually agreed tags. Then again I might be imagining this, as it's friday at ten past five!
Jon Pratty
Editor
24 Hour Museum
01273 820052
07739 287392
[log in to unmask]
The National Virtual Museum
Britain's Best Museum and Gallery website - Web User Magazine
Best Educational Website, New Statesman New Media Awards, 2005
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Lowndes [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 03 February 2006 16:35
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Electronic Museum news - Feb 2006
Nick wrote:
...It's only when you have a significant number of people
contributing from different contexts that large-scale stable patterns of classification
begin to appear.
Do they? I've been looking around a few of the 'tag cloud' using sites and I don't find much evidence of this or any other really useful 'groupings' of terms into 'relationship clusters' to help with finding stuff. Pretty chaotic the lot of them. Please point me at a good, example if you know one, anyone.
Looking at flickr for instance- for the tag paris, related tags today are just 3, : francia, rodin, airport . Thats a pretty random bunch at best - there's no meaning behind it apart from the fact that a photo has been tagged with paris and these terms by n people. It does not help me 'expand my query' from paris in any meaningful way. More hit and miss than Google? Tags are VERY specific - too specific to be very useful unless tied into something more formal? (c.f. Brian's earlier post)
cheers
Mike
|