You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Taxonomy’ tag.

First workshop of the day with Seth Early. Free form live blog entry of his thoughts (bullets) and mine (in parenthesis)

  • Search is not magic – (praise allah!)
  • Organizational psychologist vs taxonomist
  • (General consensus among the group to better understand the mental mind)
  • You cannot remove all mechanisms for organization, you need to know how content is formed.
  • Great point on how you need to know where your financial information comes from just like you need to know how your content is formed. For example, you don’t want to know how much money you have, you want to know where your money came and went.
  • User research is much cheaper if you do it at the onset.
  • (I totally need more cream for this coffee)
  • Things change faster in the business world than they do in the technical world (really? because I think it’s a pretty neck in neck race)
  • Some content is unambiguous (IA)
  • Some content has various meaning and nuance (semantic)
  • System for organizing information (parent child/relationship) – Taxonomy
  • Is mr potato a action vegetable figure? Discuss (this begets the semantic conversation)
  • Goal of Taxonomy an organized, agreed upon mechanism for naming (preferred term)
  • Taxonomy is a common language for business (gimme god damn, YES!)
  • Cannot get the attention of the organization (common/maddening pain point)
  • People think search is like a utility that you just plug in and it works. (I can see some great infographics being formed around this point)
  • We have to think of search as an experience.
  • Search is about metadata whether we have it or not
  • If content is structured it is easier to derive metadata.
  • Search is messy (hmmm, I have heard the same thing about content)
  • People search in very ambiguous terms, but want very specific results.
  • Search is a conversation, when a question is asked, there are follow up back questions, the need for disambiguation.
  • (Feeling wicked smaht that I have a good example for disambiguation.)
  • News stories are inherently structured (who what why where what) (Waiting for the journalist to stand up and shout “Recognize!”)
  • (Just noticed I still have yellow spots on my hand from this weekend’s unfortunate exploding spray paint incident.)
  • Organizations do not think about the lifecycle of their content. Reuse/archive/disposal
  • Social tagging – folksonomy Structured tagging – taxonomy
  • break
  • email is notoriously unstructured
  • Content object model – map of the structure of a document
  • content metadata allows for reuse.
  • UX is at the intersection of taxonomies, metadata and content objects.
  • when you tag content, you have such a better idea of what the user is doing (my interpretation)
  • (I drink an unconscionable amount of water.)
  • I look at taxonomy as an extension of metadata.
  • still confused as to who governs the taxonomy.
  • Google one box – still configuration once you get under the hood
  • You can use your taxonomy to define your trigger, provider, etc
  • You are not going to get the same internal/external experience – Argument for why you don’t simply just “Get the google”
  • Mapping synonyms – taxononmy
  • (Biggest takeaway from the workshop so far is my ability to type taxonomy wicked fast.)
  • a thesaurus is a specialized taxonomy
  • ontology is a collection of taxonomy
  • Goals of taxonomy – improve ux
  • (Disagree with the assertion that not all information can’t be intuitive.  Organized properly I believe it can.)
  • Taxonomy is not the same as navigation (hammered home)
  • (totally want this list of doc types) Analyst report, assessment, benchmarks, best practice, brochures, campaign, case studies, competition, config guide, contract, customer reference, data sheet, event, faq, guides, license agreements, migration, presentations, press releases, price lists, quick ref guide, white papers (whew…I got it)
  • (Current line for lunch menu: halved sammiches: 2/1 Lobster rolls: 61/1)
  • Navigational Taxonomy? (officially lost)
  • Facet is a top level category in the taxonomy
  • Categorizing content- statistical/linguistic vs rules-based
  • All content is not equal
  • Folksonomy does not inherently help. More an internal mechanism than an external help.
  • Lunch!

Twitter Updates

Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.