OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

ebxml-regrep message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Subject: re "What is a R"

Message text written by Terry Allen
>Of course there must be a human-readable interface to the stored objects, 
but it must be constructed from the metadata for those objects.  As you
mention library classification schemes, you might want to look at


which allows navigation of the quite complex metadata librarians
actually use.<



Thanks for finding an example that EXACTLY illustrates the point.

This site is perfectly functional for trained librarians to use - but
is utterly useless for normal business people.

Let's try some use cases against this site:

1) I run a 'All Fields' search against the keyword 'Chess', I get
     16+ pages of content to sift thru - not in my life-time - too much

2) So I go back and refine the search - I'm actually looking for
     chess material relating to the French Defense, so I change
     the search criteria to Chess AND French - All Fields, and
     re-run.  Ooops - I get a single link to a Web Page of a 
     local school in Ohio - not exactly what I had in mind.

So what is this teaching us?

That the generalized classification and searching mechanisms
in Repositories like this is EXACTLY why they are failing to 
deliver broad-based adoption outside of highly specialized
niche implementations.  Dictionaries were created 500 years
ago when printing presses were invented.  They are next to
useless for empowering you to find information, unless you
are prepared to do line-by-line exhaustive searches.

You absolutely MUST expose a business functional, directed
searching mechanism FIRST.  This enables end-users to 
see immediately what is available within the Repository.
THEN they know straightaway if they have reached the right
place to even find an answer.  Generalized searching methods
are not adequate.

In the document I was commenting on, the point of
departure is the modelling of business processes, which the 
CEFACT TMWG has embraced.  If you want to take issue with that
decision, you'll probably have to show them how you can get the
results they think they need without the machinery they think
they need.

As for the TMWG draft - this is only a working document and 
has not been broadly adopted by the X12 membership.  As such
it is clear WHY the ebXML effort needs to put the eBusiness 
facilitation first - and YES, you can bet that I will be demonstrating
software and XML mechanisms that do simply, inituitively and 
effectively meet the business need here.


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Search: Match: Sort by:
Words: | Help

Powered by eList eXpress LLC