PDA

View Full Version : Are new forum search options being considered?



lardom
02-20-2012, 05:53 PM
Specifically, could 'tags' be implemented to augment the forum search engine? Sometimes search results produce "zero" if you don't add "s" in the search terms. My current area of interest, for example, 'speech recognition', was hidden in threads that discussed 'Fourier Transforms' and 'Goertzel'. I bypassed these words taking for granted they contained nothing that I would find useful.
In a nutshell it would be good if the forum search engine 'suggested' related key words.

Heater.
02-20-2012, 06:02 PM
In general I would forget about the forum search and go straight to google. Use googles "site" feature. For example enter a search like: "site:forums.parallax.com speach recognition". You don't want the double quotes in the google search box of course. This works like a charm.
Now, when yo do that you will come up with threads about FFT or whatever that may seem "out their". But isn't that why you do the search, to find new stuff?
I would guess a semantic tag system would never work. Who is going to get those tags right?

Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi)
02-20-2012, 06:24 PM
Tags are already implemented in the Advanced Search. But they're not much good if people don't routinely add tags to their posts.

-Phil

lardom
02-20-2012, 06:31 PM
@Heater, I think you're right but I did a Yahoo search recently which linked to this forum after ten! pages. I am annoyed at myself for coming so late to the discussion. Part of my problem was that I told myself I wanted to focus on code that did 'physical' work. I found the absolute best information in the "Fourier Transforms for Dummies" thread. I'm wiser now and I won't overlook what might be an important forum topic again.

Heater.
02-20-2012, 06:34 PM
There is a lot of talk out there about the "semantic web". Seems to be what you are after. Search for meanings not words or phrases. Problem is, at least o my mind, who or what is going to asign meanings to things.
For example imagine I have just invented the FFT. What the hell do I tag it with? How could I possibly understand the billion and one uses it may have? How would anyone looking for "speach recognition" ever find it?

Heater.
02-20-2012, 06:40 PM
What is this "Yahoo" of which you speak:)
Searching the net with google whatever is much like any other search for knowledge. Full of dead ends, miss information and frustration. On the plus side the net is much bigger than my local library or the people around me I might ask. Sometimes a question on the forum is the best search query:)

Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi)
02-20-2012, 06:43 PM
I read recently that Google is beginning to veer away from pure "search", to figuring out from their queries what people really want to know and either providing or finding the answers. This entails some sort of semantic smarts. It's annoying, though, when you want to restrict the results to those which actually contain the words specified, and when half of them don't.

-Phil

Heater.
02-20-2012, 07:10 PM
Phil,
Yes, Google might want to do that. But it's horrible. Like targeted advertising. You end up trapped in a world of your own creation with no means of escape. If you constrain me to what I'm already interested in how can I ever grow?

mindrobots
02-20-2012, 07:21 PM
Sheep feel safe in flocks.....it's a baaaaaaaad idea!
(unless you are able to make money off it by targeting searches or herding searchers to certain places)

lardom
02-20-2012, 07:22 PM
Now that I think about it, as late as 2007 I assumed that programming was like painting a mural pixel by pixel. I would not have done a search. I would never have even touched an mc. It was only because I wanted a machine that no one made. If I couldn't find it or afford it I would make it.. A couple people later admitted they thought I was crazy...I agreed because I didn't think I could do what I imagined.
I wish I had known how much I like this technology when I was a young man. I am actively reviewing some of my long held assumptions.