SIGIA-L Mail Archives: RE: SIGIA-L: understanding metadata
RE: SIGIA-L: understanding metadata
From: Rosenberg, Maryanne (Maryanne.Rosenberg_at_dotrs.gov.au)
Date: Fri Aug 31 2001 - 01:20:40 EDT
>>"Metacrap: Putting the torch to seven straw-men of the meta->>utopia"
>>The above, of course, is mostly for general sites.
This paper is really lightweight and has no real bearing on the way that we
are implementing metadata here in Australia to achieve the Government Online
Strategy. We use the Australian Government Locator Service (AGLS) which has
been developed by the National Archives of Australia. There are supporting
implementation manuals and user documentation for development and
implementation of the standard.
The trick is of course to be able to implement the standard to truly capture
the intrinsic and extrinsic value of resources and services. And it doesn't
stop here - effective IA and search engine seeding are crucial to providing
the user with the information they are seeking.
>>I think the process of getting a bunch results from a search >>engine
>>of which may even be pretty far afield) and perusing them >>.until "either
>>the search or the searcher is exhausted," as one list member >>here put it
>>recently in NYTimes, sounds fairly "serendipitous" to me.
Serendipity as I was using in my earlier post relates to the user being able
to scan around the book on the shelf for like items. These titles have been
placed on the shelves due to their subject nature and classification
schemes. Unlike a search engine where position can be bought this is not
I have developed user guidelines for applying metadata to resources and
invariably the implementor gets carried away and adds too many subject terms
or too much coverage information which in the automated search environment
reduces the precision and recall dramatically! To look at really
"uncontrolled" metadata across other websites I am often amused at how terms
have been selected for indexing. Getting back to the point about buying
position, there may well be relevant information in the search results but
it is placed 20 pages down in the list but for some (as here in Australia in
some regions) connectivity is limited and time/money is precious. Studies
have shown that people get very frustrated after a time (any one remember
how long) if they can't find what they are searching for in the first few
>>I just remembered a time when I was searching something
>>technical, did a
>>Google search, went to a site for a white paper, read it,
>>liked it, looked
>>up the author, went to his page, followed the link to his
>>home town in
>>Wisconsin, read an interesting blurb about some cheese,
>> ended up ordering
>>cheese online. OK, I can be easily distracted :-) but
>>possible over the Net, I'd say.
Ah yes, in this context you may well be correct but not to the point I was
making earlier when real research is what is required. I do agree that the
Internet can be a good starting point but it is not and I believe should
never be the only way to find information. The medical website is a case in
point. I worked at my last contract on the Australian HealthInsite website.
It required an extensive review process before any information was allowed
to be posted - in some cases it could take up to 4 months for content to be
approved. Quality and Authority is what is required.
I guess I must say that my focus is that of providing Government information
to clients and understand that the focus for these sites are different to
what most of you would be doing.
Department of Transport and Regional Services
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2
: Sun Nov 23 2003 - 22:54:48 EST