Comments for Topify! http://topify.wordpress.com Giving natural topics a second chance Wed, 23 Jul 2008 17:09:44 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=MU Comment on Content is King. Or should I say Tyrant? by More on "Too Many Choices, Too Much Content" | sarahintampa http://topify.wordpress.com/2008/05/14/content-is-king-or-should-i-say-tyrant/#comment-9 More on "Too Many Choices, Too Much Content" | sarahintampa Wed, 14 May 2008 19:18:36 +0000 http://topify.wordpress.com/?p=9#comment-9 [...] Content is King. Or should I say Tyrant? [...] [...] Content is King. Or should I say Tyrant? [...]

]]> Comment on Content is King. Or should I say Tyrant? by Sarah Perez http://topify.wordpress.com/2008/05/14/content-is-king-or-should-i-say-tyrant/#comment-8 Sarah Perez Wed, 14 May 2008 16:16:56 +0000 http://topify.wordpress.com/?p=9#comment-8 Even filtering the duplicates would be a good start - I agree. Thanks for the link! :) Even filtering the duplicates would be a good start - I agree. Thanks for the link! :)

]]> Comment on Tags and Topics - Yin and Yang or a Dysfunctional Marriage? by Marty http://topify.wordpress.com/2008/05/07/tags-and-topics-yin-and-yang-or-a-dysfunctional-marriage/#comment-5 Marty Sat, 10 May 2008 09:48:03 +0000 http://topify.wordpress.com/?p=7#comment-5 Hi and thanks for your comment. :) I don't think I proposed to reduce the number of tags, and if I did, let me clarify myself. I suggest that we don't need two word layers for textual content (for non-textual content like videos tags are still the number one tool). What we have right now in texts is the standard layer - the _words_ themselves, which are never 100% precise, since words are employed to mean exactly what the writer wants them to and not as some universal concept. And then we have the covering tag-layer, which is also comprised of _words_ that are not unambiguous. So why not just have one layer, where you have the text, from which you take the key words to "tag" itself. Again, I'm only suggesting this for textual content and this way the number of tags would not be reduced (the number of tags equals the number of all words now and will be the same after, ie. infinite). Hi and thanks for your comment. :) I don’t think I proposed to reduce the number of tags, and if I did, let me clarify myself. I suggest that we don’t need two word layers for textual content (for non-textual content like videos tags are still the number one tool).

What we have right now in texts is the standard layer - the _words_ themselves, which are never 100% precise, since words are employed to mean exactly what the writer wants them to and not as some universal concept. And then we have the covering tag-layer, which is also comprised of _words_ that are not unambiguous. So why not just have one layer, where you have the text, from which you take the key words to “tag” itself.

Again, I’m only suggesting this for textual content and this way the number of tags would not be reduced (the number of tags equals the number of all words now and will be the same after, ie. infinite).

]]> Comment on Tags and Topics - Yin and Yang or a Dysfunctional Marriage? by Ben http://topify.wordpress.com/2008/05/07/tags-and-topics-yin-and-yang-or-a-dysfunctional-marriage/#comment-4 Ben Sat, 10 May 2008 07:47:47 +0000 http://topify.wordpress.com/?p=7#comment-4 One thing I think is always worth thinking about when considering the role of tags is their relationship to non-textual content. Tags are not just about stories, they are about anything. In fact, they are much more important when the content that is tagged can't be interpreted by a normal text indexing algorithm. The idea of using NLP techniques in the tagging process is good (see Twine.com), but there is more that can be done by engaging the viewer of the thing that is tagged because people really are, still, much smarter - or at least much more interesting, than machines. Why do you think it would be useful to reduce the number of possible tags ? One thing I think is always worth thinking about when considering the role of tags is their relationship to non-textual content. Tags are not just about stories, they are about anything. In fact, they are much more important when the content that is tagged can’t be interpreted by a normal text indexing algorithm. The idea of using NLP techniques in the tagging process is good (see Twine.com), but there is more that can be done by engaging the viewer of the thing that is tagged because people really are, still, much smarter - or at least much more interesting, than machines.

Why do you think it would be useful to reduce the number of possible tags ?

]]>