On Wed, 23 Apr 1997, Jack Gilding wrote:
> Dear meta2ers
> I am resending this message as I have received no responses to my earlier
> post and believe it raises some important general questions about how we
> format the content of recommended values in DC schemes so that they perform
> the role of defined values for controlled vocabulary searches but still
> meet the wider DC objective that the contents are useful even if users do
> not know about specific schemes. I need to make a recommendation on the
I would tend to agree that if you have specific aims in mind that
you specify a scheme defining your vocabulary, then persuade your users
to use it.
I started using a set of types from a web-oriented vocabulary a year or so
ago, then changed it to a named scheme according to some older version of
DC, so it's currently "VW96.Objecttype". Several people have used it, but
not enough to base a search engine filter on it. However, I do display
the value for a search match on other keywords.
Incidentally, folding all "type", "Objecttype", "VW96.Objecttype",
"resource-type" etc. together, the most common types I've found are:
Document
Homepage
Index
Howto
SearchEngine
My original idea was to have a dragdown list in the search engine,
"Require Type=" or something. Currently I just fold the type into the
general keywords with a specific weight tag, so that it might perhaps
be given more weight than other keys.
I don't have a captive user base; it's just a suggestion for anyone adding
a URL to the search engine.
(the list is at http://vancouver-webpages.com/META/bycount.shtml#type
and the VW96 schema at http://vancouver-webpages.com/VWbot/VW96-schema.html)
Andrew Daviel
TRIUMF & Vancouver Webpages
|