W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-comments@w3.org > August 2009

Re: "scheme" attribute of META element

From: Mike Thacker <mike.thacker@esd.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 09:26:41 +0100
Message-ID: <6b32244e0908280126o350f2bc1x86fddb84af5ea5b8@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: Tom Dent <tom.dent@porism.com>, public-html-comments@w3.org
>>You don't need the "scheme" attribute to do that, though. This is
basically just synonym matching; you could apply the same synonym matching
to all terms on the page, and to all metadata values, regardless of the
scheme="" attribute.<<

Well the scheme defines the meaning of the content in a precise context.

So "Apple" from a scheme defining computers, would be different from "Apple"
in a scheme defining fruit.

In this case "Abandoned vehicles" has a precise meaning in LGSL.  It defines
a service that UK councils are required to provide under a law which defines
the scope of the service and the duties of the council.  Pages with that
term in the metadata with the "LGSL" scheme are contributing towards the
fulfilment of that duty.


>>(How do you map the postcode to that page, by the way?)<<

The government site in question uses licensed data which identifies the
council whose geaographical scope contains the specified post code.

Hope this helps.

Do say if you still feel that I am missing something and that scheme is
redundant.

Mike



On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 19:58, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:

> On Wed, 19 Aug 2009, Tom Dent wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 12:19 PM, Ian Hickson<ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
> > > On Tue, 4 Aug 2009, Tom Dent wrote:
> > >> On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> The scheme does not directly impact on the user, but can (for
> > >> example) do so via search software.  You can see a view of IPSV at
> > >> http://www.esd.org.uk/standards/ipsv/viewer/ or LGSL at
> > >> http://www.esd.org.uk/standards/lgsl/viewer .
> > >>
> > >> If a user searched for pages by using a "non-preferred term", the
> > >> search engine should convert that to an IPSV preferred term and then
> > >> return all content with that preferred term in its metadata (with the
> > >> IPSV scheme). The search software might also suggest showing content
> > >> for broader and narrower subject headings from the IPSV hierarchy.
> > >>
> > >> The LGSL is being used to reference local authority sites in the UK
> > >> Government's Directgov site (at http://www.direct.gov.uk/) which is
> > >> used as a portal to local authority sites, and uses LGSL to reference
> > >> pages.
> > >
> > > This doesn't really seem like a very compelling use case. Surely more
> > > modern search technologies would be a significantly more effective way
> > > of addressing the same problem at the user level, but with a
> > > significantly better user experience? Can you walk me through what a
> > > typical user might search for in a way that metadata with a scheme
> > > would affect the result? I'm having trouble figuring out what a
> > > suitable "non-preferred term" might be. For example, I did a search on
> > > direct.gov.uk for "how do i report foreign income for tax purposes",
> > > which gave me the same top result as Google did for that same search
> > > (with a site restrict), and did not appear to be in any way affected
> > > by metadata terms that used schemes.
> >
> > Using the LGSL metadata can make the seach at the Directgov site more
> > powerful than Google. For example, this page about abandoned vehicles
> > references LGSL:
> >
> >
> http://www.chiltern.gov.uk/site/scripts/services_info.php?serviceID=306&startsWith=A
> >
> > <meta name="eGMS.subject.service" lang="en" scheme="LGSL"
> > content="Abandoned vehicles" />
> >
> > Doing a Google search for that abandoned vehicles and a postcode in that
> > authority does not return the correct page:
> > http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=de&q=HP5+1RS+abandoned+vehicles
> > However entering your postcode into the Directgov site (which also
> > references the LGSL in the URL) does:
> >
> >
> http://local.direct.gov.uk/LDGRedirect/LocationSearch.do?searchtype=1&LGSL=372&LGIL=0&Style=&formsub=t&text=HP5+1RS
>
> You don't need the "scheme" attribute to do that, though. This is
> basically just synonym matching; you could apply the same synonym matching
> to all terms on the page, and to all metadata values, regardless of the
> scheme="" attribute.
>
> (How do you map the postcode to that page, by the way?)
>
>
> On Wed, 19 Aug 2009, Mike Thacker wrote:
> >
> > As I understand it, this thread is concerned with the usefulness of
> > keeping the "scheme" attribute of the META element.
> >
> > The discussion comes down to whether or not schemes defining the format
> > of values or, as described here, controlled lists adding definition and
> > precise meaning to values (in the "content" attribute) are useful.
> >
> > To me adding defining the controlled list from which a precise value is
> > taken has tremendous value, as described by Tom.
> >
> > Ian you say:
> >
> > >>Surely more modern search technologies would be a significantly more
> > effective way of addressing the same problem at the user level, but with
> > a significantly better user experience?<<
> >
> > Can you say (or provide a link to indicate) what these modern search
> > technologies might be?
>
> Well for example in this particular case it's not clear that the scheme=""
> attribute is helping at all. Surely it would be better, as noted above, to
> just apply the same processing to _all_ the keywords on the page, rather
> than just those in the metadata headers, regardless of scheme="".
>
> --
> Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
> http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
> Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
>
Received on Friday, 28 August 2009 08:27:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 1 June 2011 00:14:00 GMT