Subject: Re: Re: Mutually exclusive?
Newsgroups: gmane.comp.infodesign.facetedclassification
Date: 2002-12-19 19:25:07 GMT (5 years, 48 weeks, 22 hours and 29 minutes ago)
I think there are two things going on here. Misunderstanding the effect and importance of the mutual exclusivity facet. For the wine example. I like wine. I want a White that is made of grapes from California. My brother recently sent me a White from a vintner in Indiana (*gasp we do have them here) that was made from a blend of IN and CA grapes. I'm searching for this on your site that uses faceting. (I don't know the correct terms so forgive me). You've got facets for color, type, origin, flavor Facet color(C) has isolates (till they are sorted into facet heads like this and then they are foci) of: red (r) white(wh) blush(b) dayglo(for those mad dog varietals)(g) So a dayglo wine is Cg Facet type(T) has foci of: Riesling(1) Rhone(2) Merlot(3) So a Merlot is T3 Facet origin(O) has foci of: Indiana (!) New Jersey(;0) California(#1) So a wine from Indiana is O! ***now this may need to be divided for the truly picky into Region -> : or City: or what have you. I picked state for ease of explanation. Remember there is not one right way and you may want to deconstruct the facet further. Flavor has foci of..... I think you get the point. Now note that I have assigned facet labels to the items for what comes next. You want a white from california, the system searches for Cwh O#1 I want a dayglo Riesling with grapes from IN and NJ The system searches for Cg T1 0!/;) note the / which glues together the two states in the Origin facet. Note that it is possible to have multiple foci from the same facet. The mutual exclusivity rule does not prevent this. Users can put any of these characteristics together in a search or just one of them. > requirement. Maybe a library person can help me out here? In XFML > (http://xfml.org), the mutually exclusive idea only applies to the > top level of a tree, for example "places" and "things to do". They > have to be mutually exclusive, so two facets called "places to live > in" and "places to visit" would make bad facets. With facet analysis the hierarchy is built on the fly, in response to the user, not by the person making the analysis. The user determines (in an ideal environment such as an electronic one.) And yes some of us are library types, though I prefer the term LIS types for greater inclusivity ;0 The hierarchy builds in response to the user query of the system, it does not necessarily exist before. Yahoo is a hierarchical system which some people claim is a faceted system. It is not. It uses chaining but violates every other concept of facet analysis. You've got to follow a chain to get what you want (unless like me you just search text with their search tool). They make the path, and sometimes many of them in different formulations to get to the same place. Paths already exist, they are not generated in response to your query. Thanks for playing. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: facetedclassification-unsubscribe <at> yahoogroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/