Comments on: What Do Light bulbs and the Shenandoah Valley Have in Common? The EPA Blog Tue, 28 Jul 2015 21:52:05 +0000 hourly 1 By: deng Thu, 24 Apr 2008 12:25:18 +0000 Molley:

Yes we can do more to access the relevent information for which the searcher is looking for in their context and terms. Most of the time, ordinary citizen may search with different terms other than EPA list of meta data terms.

We hear so much on search the relevant documents based on meta data, Well its only the beginning. In order to ‘harvest relevant information from an USER’s prospective through search, we need to apply search by User/searcher’s context on a semantic level, which is hard to do on generic meta data based search. Today the craze is applying Meta data which is a good start on a three dimensional problem, but only with EPA’s search terms. The other two dimensions on the technology curve (beginning) are semantic and folksonomy, and user’s context with their profile

We as humans do not think the same or as machines. As individual we all have different background, needs, experience and thoughts with words/language interpretation and communication. We spent millions on search without recognizing the human traits in acquiring and search patterns for information. My opinion is that we will never find the right search engine without applying the other two dimensions, semantic web/search and user profile. The suggested road map and technological trend on search and document rendering are a move toward dynamic searches with semantic and context search and document building from various virtual text sources. Compounded by generational experience, different terms are applicable to have different meaning and references to their own experiences.

Remember relevancy is to the ‘eye of the beholder’ the user’s purpose, intent, reference, experience and in the user context.