Comments on: Metadata fundamentals for intranets and websites

By: wendy

wendy — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 03:47:44 +0000

James, Thank you for your insight. I’m new to the design and development of websites for a small community. Your descriptions really help the new developer understand the basics.

By: James Robertson

James Robertson — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 01:36:44 +0000

@Russ, a late reply on your comment about providing metadata to help applications/bots to find data. Definitely an important aspect, but I’d highlight that concrete needs must be identified in advance.

For example, in Australian government, a lot of metadata was collected against future plans to automatically create “portals” on specific topics. But these never eventuated, in part due to the patchy quality of the metadata itself. So that left gov agencies with the mandated requirement to collect masses of data, but for no clear purpose. (This has subsequently been made optional in most cases.)

So automatic use of metadata is incredibly powerful, but only when done well (or at all!).

By: Amal Arunesh

Amal Arunesh — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 11:50:43 +0000

Great to know the basics of metadata. The article is very simple to understand.

Could you tell me how to insert metadata in the intranet. Is XML the best way to integrate metadata

By: Simplify your intranet by using PDFs - but DON’T make documents searchable « manIA

Sat, 29 Nov 2008 16:11:48 +0000

[...] can learn more about metadata from James Robertson’s article in the Step Two [...]

By: Brian F

Brian F — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 22:59:40 +0000

Hmmm, maybe I need to get out more, but I haven’t seen a taxonomy that delivers much benefit. I’m happy with basic metadata as described above for basic site management but doubt we can even justify the effort put into AGLS metdata, given that it is only used by one search engine that generates maybe 1% of traffic. If metadata is only for internal use, it probably doesn’t need to be so complex, and we can simply accept that it only serves one purpose. At the CBR WSG meeting yesterday Stephen Zafira described tagging as ‘dynamic IA’, which I think is a step in the right direction towards accepting that data will be interpreted in different ways by different users, and frees us from trying to write ‘one taxonomy to rule them all’. KISS, live and let live.

By: James Robertson

James Robertson — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 01:10:17 +0000

Hi Brian, completely agree on the challenges inherent to taxonomies! These are hugely hard things to put into place, mostly due to the underlying organisational complexities.

Of course, if an effective taxonomy can be deployed, the benefits gained are ten times the initial cost. But I agree, there are few organisations who have mature enough information management practices to allow this to happen.

One good book to read on taxonomies has been written by Patrick Lambe in Singapore:

http://www.organisingknowledge.com/

By: Brian F

Brian F — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 00:19:14 +0000

After working with some biggies, I’m *very* wary of taxonomies. The theory of using established taxonomies and everyone being able to share data in insightful ways is great, it just doesn’t work. To begin with, there’s the question of which taxonomy. I was once involved with a defence project that was investigating which of say 10 main taxonomies used in Australia and by our main allies could be usefully implemented, each offering several dozen top-level categories and up to tens of thousands of individual terms. The plain fact is that no-one does or is going to use these taxonomies comprehensively or correctly. Secondly, it’s impossible to know what users want from your data. You might think you’re publishing country profiles or travel guides, but what people are searching for is economic data or industry insights. Finally, there’s the sheer size and consequent management issues of these taxonomies. The reasons you can go to hospital fills a 1000-page book in 9-point type and keeps an office within the health department quite busy. AGIMO’s new master metadata plan fills an A3 page in maybe 8-point type without even beginning to address how it will relate to other industry-specific taxonomies relevant to specific departments. All of these initiatives are fantastic in theory but will never be used by more than a handful of people. Metadata can’t be generic enough.

By: ia play :: metadata fundamentals article

ia play :: metadata fundamentals article — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 17:07:31 +0000

[...] James Robertson of Step Two has published Metadata fundamentals for intranets and websites [...]

By: James Robertson

James Robertson — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 21:30:07 +0000

Hi Martin, I love your step-by-step approach to developing a taxonomy, many organisations could learn from this! The use as a glossary is a nice end-user feature to deliver from the behind-the-scenes taxonomy…

By: James Robertson

James Robertson — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 21:29:05 +0000

Hi Kate, metadata can be used in a variety of powerful ways, including driving content reuse and automated related links.

Of course, a high level of discipline is required to make this successful. If the metadata isn’t consistently high-quality, then automated uses of it can break down, or generate some strange results.

Well done on making this work, no wonder you have an award-winning intranet! :-)