Re: SIGIA-L: No Metadata

• Next message: Avi Rappoport: "Re: SIGIA-L: No Metadata"
• Previous message: Chung, Hedahne: "RE: SIGIA-L: Is Rome burning?"
• In reply to: Derek Rogerson: "SIGIA-L: No Metadata"
• Next in thread: Avi Rappoport: "Re: SIGIA-L: No Metadata"
• Reply: Avi Rappoport: "Re: SIGIA-L: No Metadata"
• Reply: Michael Fry: "Re: SIGIA-L: No Metadata"
• Reply: Jonathan M. Broad: "Re: SIGIA-L: No Metadata"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

I wrote:

>Somebody tell me why there is no NOT metadata. This would
>make metadata concepts much more useful.

Dudes. People. Brethren. Listen. I appreciate the remedial lesson in
metadata. Thank you. But I know what metadata is already.

I want to know *why* IAs are not using NOT logic with metadata concepts. Why
isn't this implemented? Maybe IAs don't understand what metadata is, and how
to use it?

Jonathan Broad wrote:

>This should be addressed in the interface

I understand what you are saying here. But I don't believe this is correct.
Besides, the metadata is the interface (at bare minimum an extension of).

Wouldn't it be more useful to give 'NOT data' it's own meta-definition,
rather than relying on search interfaces/applications to invert the logic?
(ie. passing the buck)

It would seem to me you *must* have this "NOT meta-definition" to
successfully exclude objects. (ie. you must explicitly say something is NOT
about something for it to be true -- "no means no")

Just because some object includes 'apples' as a keyword, it does not follow
that it is 'exclusively' about apples.

Keyword metadata cannot be utilized inversely.

Inverse-keywords must be explicitly stated (ie. 'NOT' metadata).

Christina Wodtke said:

> are you saying antonyms aren't a class of metadata?

Who cares about antonyms ? I'm talking about exclusion-methods not
oppositional directives.

Jonathan Broad wrote:

>it *might* make sense to include antonymic metadata (hmm...
>that might be a googlewhack...). But it should be recognized
>that this is almost certainly not necessary.

followed by:

>Users may very well seek information "negatively". In fact,
>theories of information scent leads one to think that negative
>feedback is almost as important as positive feedback in this
>regard.

Interfaces aside, it would appear you are in denial of yourself here, (or
you are aware of your opposition to the user), doesn't it?

Derek Rogerson
http://derekrogerson.com

 "Subject is known by what she sees."

• Next message: Avi Rappoport: "Re: SIGIA-L: No Metadata"
• Previous message: Chung, Hedahne: "RE: SIGIA-L: Is Rome burning?"
• In reply to: Derek Rogerson: "SIGIA-L: No Metadata"
• Next in thread: Avi Rappoport: "Re: SIGIA-L: No Metadata"
• Reply: Avi Rappoport: "Re: SIGIA-L: No Metadata"
• Reply: Michael Fry: "Re: SIGIA-L: No Metadata"
• Reply: Jonathan M. Broad: "Re: SIGIA-L: No Metadata"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Sun Nov 23 2003 - 22:55:02 EST