Hierarchical Keyword Tree

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Hierarchical Keyword Tree

Leonard Mada
Hi,

I made some progress regarding the keywords. Unfortunately, I believe
that a plain keyword list won't solve much of the current problems; see
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Bib-Keywords paragraph 2.2  
"Limitations of Current Keyword Strategies" for some reasons why basic
keywords are far from adequate.

I believe that a solution to this problem could lie in a hierarchical
keyword tree. Users would be allowed to create dynamically such a
keyword tree (using existing keywords) to enhance the capabilities of
the search strategies. See the paragraph 3.1.2 "Hierarchical Keyword
Tree" on the same page for a more extended discussion.

Because all this is virtually new land, I would like to open a
brainstorming session. I would appreciate any comments and suggestions.

I come up with another idea regarding the standardisation of keywords. I
believe that the ultimate goal is to have standard keywords, too.
However, as this will be difficult, a possible solution is to let users
specify their own keywords. Have a talk-back feature. Collect used
keywords over a period of 1-2 years. And build a list with the most
frequently used keywords. These are likely to be used more widely and
therefore could be bundled with future versions of OOo. Of course, users
could change this list and adapt it further to their specific needs, but
it would be a starting point for their own list.

Kind regards,

Leonard Mada
[aka discoleo]

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Hierarchical Keyword Tree

David Wilson-7
Leonard Mada.

        Your have raised some very interesting questions. I think the idea of setting
a scheme for sharing subject specific key word lists is well worth
considering - and rather simple to implement.

David


On Wednesday 27 September 2006 7:51 am, Leonard Mada wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I made some progress regarding the keywords. Unfortunately, I believe
> that a plain keyword list won't solve much of the current problems; see
> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Bib-Keywords paragraph 2.2
> "Limitations of Current Keyword Strategies" for some reasons why basic
> keywords are far from adequate.
>
> I believe that a solution to this problem could lie in a hierarchical
> keyword tree. Users would be allowed to create dynamically such a
> keyword tree (using existing keywords) to enhance the capabilities of
> the search strategies. See the paragraph 3.1.2 "Hierarchical Keyword
> Tree" on the same page for a more extended discussion.
>
> Because all this is virtually new land, I would like to open a
> brainstorming session. I would appreciate any comments and suggestions.
>
> I come up with another idea regarding the standardisation of keywords. I
> believe that the ultimate goal is to have standard keywords, too.
> However, as this will be difficult, a possible solution is to let users
> specify their own keywords. Have a talk-back feature. Collect used
> keywords over a period of 1-2 years. And build a list with the most
> frequently used keywords. These are likely to be used more widely and
> therefore could be bundled with future versions of OOo. Of course, users
> could change this list and adapt it further to their specific needs, but
> it would be a starting point for their own list.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Leonard Mada
> [aka discoleo]
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

--
-------------------
David N. Wilson
Co-Project Lead for the Bibliographic
OpenOffice Project
http://bibliographic.openoffice.org

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Hierarchical Keyword Tree

Matthias Basler-2
Leonard Mada wrote:

> I made some progress regarding the keywords. Unfortunately, I believe
> that a plain keyword list won't solve much of the current problems; see
> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Bib-Keywords paragraph 2.2
> "Limitations of Current Keyword Strategies" for some reasons why basic
> keywords are far from adequate.
>
> I believe that a solution to this problem could lie in a hierarchical
> keyword tree.

Just a question for me to understand what exactly you are talking about when you refer to "keywords". I ask because in German language there are two different words with different concepts behind, which you both find in every library: "Schlagwort" and "Stichwort"

As wikipedia correctly notes, "Schlagworte" are controlled lists of words, often with hierarchical structure, whereas "Stichworte" are simply a set of words used in the document or used to find this document in a search.
To give examples typical routes using "Schlagworte" are
Nonfiction -> Science -> Life sciences -> Ecology -> Plant ecology
or Nonfiction -> Guidebooks -> Cooking -> Asian meals

"Stichworte" are not usually stored hierarchically, they give just hints what topics are covered or what words appear often in the document. However, when defining them for a new document, it might help the user to have a list of typical ones around, possibly organized in a hierarchical structure.
Is it that what you mean? Is it that what is the english term "keywords" referring to?
--
Matthias Basler
[hidden email]

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Hierarchical Keyword Tree

Bruce D'Arcus
In reply to this post by Leonard Mada

On Sep 26, 2006, at 5:51 PM, Leonard Mada wrote:

> I come up with another idea regarding the standardisation of keywords.  
> I believe that the ultimate goal is to have standard keywords, too.  
> However, as this will be difficult, a possible solution is to let  
> users specify their own keywords. Have a talk-back feature. Collect  
> used keywords over a period of 1-2 years. And build a list with the  
> most frequently used keywords. These are likely to be used more widely  
> and therefore could be bundled with future versions of OOo. Of course,  
> users could change this list and adapt it further to their specific  
> needs, but it would be a starting point for their own list.

I've suggested something like this to the Zotero developers:

<http://netapps.muohio.edu/blogs/darcusb/darcusb/archives/2006/09/09/ 
zotero-and-the-practical-semantic-web>

But there you use other mechanisms for associating tags than uses  
having to worry about explicitly defining a hierarchy.

BTW, Zotero ought to be going public beta next week. I suggest people  
take a close look when it does.

Bruce

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Hierarchical Keyword Tree

Bruce D'Arcus
In reply to this post by Matthias Basler-2

On Sep 28, 2006, at 4:04 PM, Matthias Basler wrote:

> Just a question for me to understand what exactly you are talking
> about when you refer to "keywords".

AKA "tags" as used in Flickr, etc., etc.

I actually believe the basic idea of tags is right (really simple for
uses to add), but that we can make them much more powerful while
retaining their simplicity.

Bruce

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]