../[ dariusz grabka ]\..

I’m trying to wrap my head around all of the information I’m reading about image search. Search, retrieval, information, data, all of these terms are loaded, and used differently depending on whether I’m reading an HCI paper, a text analysis paper, or a blog post about search engine optimisation (SEO).

In hopes of simplifying things, I’ve settled on a human-centred, conceptual definition of search:

Search refers to the process of a user developing a need, defining a query, retrieving information, viewing result(s), providing feedback, and refinements of those steps.

The end result does not have to be finding a single result. Occasionally, other steps in the search process, such as seeing a result set, can satisfy the users need. For example, if the need was to gain information (”What does a ‘87 Oldsmobile Toronado FE3 look like?”) rather than find a specific image (”I need a picture of a black ‘84 Cutty!”), viewing the result set may be enough.

Figure 1 is an illustrates the definition of search, in the human and interface context.

» Read more …

The gentleman in this video, Dr. David Weinberger, thinks it’s a pretty terrible idea to try to categorise ideas in the same way we categorise physical things in the physical world.

Many people who deal with information on a regular basis tend to think that since you can only stack a chair in a single location, the virtual representation of that chair should be categorised in one place as well. It’s hard to explain why that’s a silly idea (and why it’s done often), but he does a very good job of doing just that.

He draws from a really neat reference: The Library of Babel by Jorge Luis Borges, and compares Wikipedia to Borges’ theoretical, infinite library (that, naturally, drives its librarian mad). That bit is in the Q&A period at the very end.

Thanks to Gil P. for this one.

video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2159021324062223592

» Read more …