Archive for april, 2010

Eskil Andréen

Knowledge management: retrieve, visualize and communicate!

april 30 - 2010 | Eskil Andréen

As noted by Swedish daily paper Metro, Findwise is working with JCDEC, the Joint Concept Development & Experimentation Centre at Swedish Military Headquarters. In Metro’s words the project aims at developing a knowledge management system for the headquarters of tomorrow. The system is expected to be up and running in time for the international military exercise VIKING 11, to be executed in April of 2011.

Good decisions stem from good information; this is true for both military and civilian enterprises. Vast amounts of time and resources are being invested in order to collect information. But to what end? Granted, somewhere among that information there is probably something you will find useful. But large amounts of information quickly become incomprehensible. In order to combat information overload you need a select-and-filter tool such as Search, and that’s where Findwise comes in.

However, for JCDEC it is not enough to simply locate the information they have available. Captain Alexandra Larsson, Concept Development Lead for Knowledge Support, makes this fact very clear. It is just as important to get an idea of what information is not there. In essence, JCDEC is in the process of creating information from information. This is also one of the great differences between the kind of web-based search and retrieval systems we have come to depend on and a state of the art knowledge management system. The latter is not just a retrieval tool; it is an information workbench where the user can select, retrieve, examine and manipulate information.

(Läs mer…)

Max Charas

Solr Processing Pipeline

april 19 - 2010 | Max Charas

Hi again Internet,

For once I have had time to do some thinking. Why is there no powerful data processing layer between the Lucene Connector Framework and Solr? I´ve been looking into the Apache Commons Processing Pipeline. It seems like a likely candidate to do some cool stuff.  Look at the diagram below.

A schematic drawing of a Solr Pipeline concept. (Click to enlarge)

What I´m thinking of is to make a transparent Solr pipeline that speaks the Solr REST protocol on each end. This means that you would be able to use SolrJ or any other API to communicate with the Pipeline.

Has anyone attempted this before?  If you’re interested in chatting about the pipeline drop me a mail or just grab me at Eurocon in Prague this year.

Maria Johansson

Combining Search and Browse – Integrated Faceted Breadcrumbs

april 16 - 2010 | Maria Johansson

Finding information can be tricky and as I have written about in one of my previous posts improving findability is not about providing a single entrypoint to information. Users have different ways of finding information (browsing, searching and asking). They often combine these techniques with each other (berrypicking) and so they all need to be supported. Peter Morville states that “Browse and Search work best in tandem… the best finding interfaces achieve a balance, letting users move fluidly between browsing and searching.”

A lot of sites are improving their search experience through the implementation of faceted search. However, very few successfully integrate faceted search and browsing on their site. Searching and browsing are treated as two separate flows of interaction instead of trying to combine them which would provide the users with a much better experience.

That is why I was glad to learn about an idea from Greg Nudelman which he presented in his session at the IASummit which I attended last week. In his session Greg introduced his idea about Integrated Faceted Breadcrumb. According to him breadcrumbs are intuitive, flexible and resourceful and they are design elements that don’t cause problems but simply work. To test his idea he conducted usability tests on a prototype using the Integrated Faceted Breadcrumb. According to his evaluation the integrated faceted breadcrumb has a lot of advantages over other faceted solutions:

  1. Combine hierarchical Location & Attribute breadcrumbs
  2. Use Change instead of Set-Remove-Set
  3. Automatically retain relevant query information
  4. Label breadcrumb aspects
  5. Make it clear how to start a new search
  6. Allow direct keyword manipulation.

I find this idea interesting and I am currently thinking about whether it could be applied into one of my own projects. (According to Greg it has not been implemented anywhere yet even though the findings from the usability testing were positive.) However I wonder if this is a concept that works well only for sites with relatively homogeneous content or if it would also work on larger collections of sites such as intranets? Can it be used in an intuitive way with a large number of facets and can it cope with the use of more complex filtering functionalities? For some sites it might not be the best idea to keep the search settings when the user changes search terms. These are some things I would like to find out. What do you think about this? Could you apply it to your site(s)? I recommend that you have a look at Greg Nudelman’s presentation on slideshare and find out for yourself. You can also find an article about the Integrated Faceted Breadcrumb on Boxes and Arrows. I look forward to a discussion about whether this is any good so write me a comment here at the findability blog or find me on twitter.

Caroline Abrahamsson

Search vocabulary – key matches, facets and query completion?

april 10 - 2010 | Caroline Abrahamsson

I have a friend who is working with finance. When I hear him talk about his job it is all ”boones” and ”upstream”. Feeling lost?

Every business has its buzzwords and the Enterprise search area is not an exception.
The worst part is that the people who work with it constantly use them. In order to bring some shread of light, here comes an explanation of the most commonly used:

Key matches (sponsored links, best bets, and Editor’s pick)
These are all words for manually forcing the correct or best information to the top of the search result list. Typically this is used to follow up on the most frequently asked search terms (derived from search statistics).  If many users for example search for ‘phone numbers’ it is wise to make the first hit in the result list be a page where phone numbers are searchable.
Key matches from an editor’s perspective include a view where they can edit page title, page description, keywords (that triggers the search) and the url to the page.
And from an end user perspective:

Query completion
Is a solution that shows suggestions of words when the users starts to enter characters in the search box. The most qualitative solutions are made from editor’s lists (where the searches are predefined built on pages that are of good quality). Apart from this it can be solved by using words that exists in the search index or searches that other users previously made. In these cases it is necessary to make sure that people have been clicking on search results after they have made the search, otherwise users might get suggestions of words that returns zero or bad quality results.

Auto complete
Is similar to query completion, but instead of giving suggestions it completes you query with the word you are most likely to write. The functionality is mainly used to help people spell correctly and help people specify a good search word (such as writing singular instead of plural etc)

Facets (navigators, refinements)
Are all words used to describe filters that help the users to narrow down their searches.
If a user is searching for a term such as ‘music player’ it is most likely that he/she wants to see the whole range of available products and then narrow down to music players that costs less then x, are red and are of a specific brand.
The same applies for internal information, where the users most likely want to filter on metadata such as file types: (word, pdf, and ppt), dates etc; on categories such as services or products; from taxonomy (describing how the information is organized).

Synonym service
This is just what it sounds like: functionality where abbreviations such as BBC equals British Broadcasting Corporation. A search for either of the words will then return result for both. The list used for synonyms are often derived from search statistics, making sure it corresponds to the users vocabulary.

I’m sure there are more words that we tend to use. in the search industry. Please post a comment if you have suggestions or questions.

3 Comments;   Topics: Search

Maria Johansson

IASummit – Information Architecture and Search

april 5 - 2010 | Maria Johansson

This upcoming week my colleague Lina and I will participate in the IASummit in Phoenix Arizona. Search, information architecture and user experience and the relationships between them is the focus for us this upcoming week. We look forward to hearing a lot of great talks, meeting interesting people and enjoying the sunny weather in Arizona.

We will be blogging from the conference but if you don’t want to wait for that you can follow me, Maria on twitter or follow the hashtag for the IASummit #ias10 so see what everyone is tweeting about.

Max Charas

Solr – the Sunny Side of Search

april 1 - 2010 | Max Charas

When I started working for Findwise two years ago, Apache Solr was one of those no-name search platforms. We could barely get our customers to consider Solr even after proving that the platform would be a perfect match for their business needs. As time passed and the financial crisis hit the world, a few of our customers started considering Solr, but then usually for the reason that it was “free” – not for the functionality of the platform.

Things have changed. More and more companies now offer support and training for Solr. It seems that the platform is gaining momentum on the enterprise market.
In fact, I was just in Oslo, Norway to become a certified Lucid Imagination training partner, as the need for training is growing rapidly, even up here in the snow-covered Nordics.

Today we even have customers approaching us asking questions about how, and not if, they should use Solr. I wouldn’t have imagined that two years ago …

Could this be the year that Solr goes head to head with the large enterprise search platforms?
And where will we be in another two years?

I wish I knew.