There has been some discussion relative to intentionally misleading people
to a resource by adding erroneous subject keywords.
Has there been any thought or discussion about providing qualified subject
meta data that would support _avoiding_ misleading resource discovery?
Intuitively - the ability to qualify primary and secondary subject keywords
would add a lot to efficient ("surgical") resource discovery. Primary
keywords are like "Yellow Pages" section headers ... they get us in the
right ball park for resource discovery; secondary keywords are essential to
fine tuning resource discovery while avoiding meaningless "hits".
As an illustration ... suppose I were coding metadata for recipes, and I
had a Cheesebread recipe that used beer. It's not a recipe FOR beer - but
it includes beer.
I would probably want the primary content meta data to include "recipe",
"cheese" and "bread"; but if I include beer, I'm going to pull in an awful
lot of people who have _no_ interest in my recipe (people looking for beer
"joints", beer company's, beer recipes, etc.) Only some very small
percentage of the people who put "beer" in their query are actually looking
for my recipe.
On the other hand, if I don't include beer ... the people who really are
looking for bread recipes that have beer as an ingredient are not going to
be able to find my recipe.
We've likely already thought of this ... but being a bit of a newbie I
don't know what the discussion was ... any thoughts or history on this?
....
|