Taxonomy & Metadata Strategies For Effective Content Management

Taxonomy Strategies
LLC
Taxonomy & metadata strategies for effective content management

Melbourne, Sydney, Canberra Masterclass
6-15 June 2007
Copyright 2007 Taxonomy Strategies LLC. All rights reserved.
Todays agenda
9:00-9:10 9:10-9:15 9:15-9:45 9:45-10:00 10:00-10:30 10:30-11:00 11:00-12:00 12:00-12:30 12:30-13:30 13:30-14:30 14:30-14:45 14:45-15:15 15:15-16:15 16:15-16:30 16:30-17:00 10 minIntroduction 5 minWarm-up exercise 30 minTaxonomy fundamentals: Building taxonomies 15 minTaxonomy exercise 30 minTaxonomy fundamentals: Taxonomy business case 30 minTea Break 60 minTaxonomy governance 30 minCapabilities self-assessment 60 minLunch 60 minTaxonomy benchmarking 15 minBenchmarking exercise 30 minTea Break 60 minContent tagging 15 minTagging exercise 30 minQ&A
2
Taxonomy Strategies LLC The business of organized
Who I am: Joseph Busch

y Over 25 years in the business of organized information. Founder, Taxonomy Strategies LLC Director, Solutions Architecture, Interwoven VP, Infoware, Metacode Technologies
(acquired by Interwoven, November 2000)
Program Manager, Getty Foundation Manager, Pricewaterhouse
y Metadata and taxonomies community leadership. President, American Society for Information Science & Technology Director, Dublin Core Metadata Initiative Adviser, National Research Council Computer Science and Telecommunications Board Reviewer, National Science Foundation Division of Information and Intelligent Systems Founder, Networked Knowledge Organization Systems/Services
Taxonomy Strategies LLC The business of organized 3
What we do
Organize Stuff
For us, taxonomy work includes:

y Metadata specification defines
the properties needed to describe content so that it can be found & used. y Vocabularies are collections of terms that are used to specify some of the metadata properties.
Some vocabularies are big
and hierarchical, some are small and flat.

y An application profile specifies
what metadata & vocabularies are required, and then represents them formally.
Recent & current projects: http://www.taxonomystrategies.com/html/clients.htm Government Commercial
Not-for-Profit
Who are you? What sectors do you work in?

Your Role
y Administrator y Records Manager y Content Manager y Communications y Editor y Information Architect y Usability Expert y Librarian y Knowledge Engineer y Ontologist y Chief Information Officer
Industrial Sector
y Agriculture & Processing Food, Lumber, Pulp & Paper y Financial Services
Banking & Insurance
y Government
Public administration Public safety
y High Tech Computers, Software & Telecommunications y Heavy Manufacturing

Steel, Automobiles & Aircraft
y Manufacturing Consumer Products y Medical & Health Care y Mining & Refining Petrochemicals, Oil & Gas y Pharmaceuticals
Why are you here?

y What are the key questions that you want answered in todays
workshop? y Please rank the questions from the most important (5) to the least important (1) y Please provide your job title, organization and department; your name is optional.
Priority (1-5) Questions
Your title or role: Your org or industry: Your dept: Your name: (optional)
Todays agenda
9
The Taxonomy problem: How to pick from > 5,000 faucets? By:
y Category y Price y Brand y Color/Finish y # Handles y Series Name y Water Filter? y Faucet Spray y Handle Shape y Soap Dispenser?
The main issue: What goes here?
y When do the
things in the list change? y How do we maintain the list? y What rules do we follow?
11
Seven phases of taxonomy development

Week: 1 Identify Objectives 2 Inventory Resources 3 Specify Metadata 4 Model Content 5 Specify Vocabularies 6 Specify Procedures 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Conduct interviews
Identify, gather & review resources Define fields & purpose Define content chunks & XML DTDs Compile controlled vocabularies Develop workflow, rules & procedures Manually tag small sample
7 Test & Train
12
Taxonomy design phases need to be iterated

Plan & Prototype 1 Identify Objectives 2 Inventory Resources 3 Specify Metadata 4 Model Content 5 Specify Vocabularies 6 Specify Procedures
Interview core team and stakeholders
Alpha Dev & Test

Review tagged samples, default procedures Gather additional resources, if any Revise if needed, bake into alpha CMS Revise if needed, bake into alpha CMS
Beta D&T
Interview alpha users Gather additional sources, if any Modify CMS for beta
Final D&T
Interview beta users
Identify, gather & review resources
Define fields & purpose
Modify for 1.0
Define content chunks & XML DTDs Compile controlled vocabularies Develop workflow rules & procedures Manually tag small sample
Modify CMS for beta Revise, use in beta CMS Modify & extend workflows
Modify for 1.0 Revise using team procedu re Finalize procedure materials
Revise, use in alpha CMS
alpha workflows in CMS
7 Test & Train
Use alpha CMS to tag larger sample
Use beta CMS to tag larger sample
Finalize training materials & train staff
13
Licensing an existing taxonomy

See Factivas taxonomy www.taxonomywarehouse.com
y There are usually license fees, but these will be less than the
effort to develop an equivalent taxonomy. y But pre-existing taxonomies rarely fit an organizations needs and may require extensive customization.
Recommendation
y Adopt a faceted approach. y Reuse existing (especially internal) vocabularies for as many
of the facets as possible. y Plan on doing full-custom Content Type and Topic taxonomies.
14
Free sources for 8 common taxonomies

Taxonomy
Organization Content Type
Definition
Organizational structure.
Potential Sources
SP 800-87, U.S. Government Manual, Your organizational structure, etc.
Structured list of the various types of Dublin Core Type Vocabulary, AGLS Document content being managed or used. Type, Your records management policy, etc. Broad market categories such as lines of business, life events, or industry codes. Place of operations or constituencies. Business activities or functions performed to accomplish mission and goals. Business topics relevant to your mission & goals. Subset of constituents to whom a piece of content is directed or is intended to be used by. Names of products/programs and services. SIC, NAICS, Your market segments, etc.
Industry
Location
FIPS 5-2, FIPS 55-3, ISO 3166, UN Statistics Div, US Postal Service, Your sales regions, etc. Federal Enterprise Architecture Business Reference Model, Enterprise ontology, Your business functions, etc. Federal Register Thesaurus, NAL Agricultural Thesaurus, Your research areas, etc. GEM, ERIC Thesaurus, IEEE LOM, Your psycho-graphics or personas, etc. ERP system, Your products and services, etc.
Business Activity Topic Audience
Products & Services
15
Typical product catalog: A-Z, then idiosyncratic categories
16
How to analyze existing product catalog categories: Principles and priorities

Preparing a product catalog for facet browsing (aka Guided Navigation) requires a category hierarchy and additional attributes. Principles
1. Categories and subcategories that could be swapped are candidates for
conversion to attributes. 2. Repeated lists of subcategories signal a possible need for an attribute. 3. The number of attributes should not exceed six or seven, so not all attribute candidates should be used.
Avoid selecting strongly correlated attributes, such as Weight and Shipping
Weight.
Priorities
1. Choose Categories that apply to many products, over those with few
products. 2. Choose Attributes that apply to many Categories over those that apply only to very few categories.
17
Product categories example: Wireless carrier
Products
Accessories Content Phones Services Batteries Cases Chargers Data Hands-Free Headsets Miscellaneous Purchased Subscription Versatile Phones Smart Devices Basic Phones Prepaid Phones International Only Phones Mobile Broadband Cards Conferencing Internet / Data Landline Phone Network & Roaming Relay Services Solutions Wireless Data
18
Product attributes example: Digital cameras in an electronics catalog

Resolution
y Types of attributes Generic attributes

Brand/Product Family/Model Price Range Usually Ships
3 Megapixels (4) 4 Megapixels (5) 5 Megapixels (27) 6-8 Megapixels (21)
Brand
Canon (15) Fuji (10) Kodak (17) Nikon (8) Olympus (9)
Merchandising attributes Usage (E-mail, Internet Browsing, Programming, ) Segment (Home, Business, Education, Government ) Region & Country Most Popular New Related Products Specialized attributes Capacity (Battery; Memory; MB; GB; BPS, ) Resolution (DPI; Megapixels; XGA, XGA, UXGA, ) Size (Display; Screen; ...) Standard (a, b, g, n, ; scsi, ata, sata, eide, ; dimm, simm, ) Type (Camera; Battery; Display; Printer; Server; Storage; Switch; )
Type
Point & Shoot (25) Digital SLR (10) Packages (5)
Price Range
$100-250 (5) $250-500 (16) $500-1000 (19) More than $1000 (3)
19
Faceted taxonomy theory & practice

y How many terms are needed to provide sufficient
granularity? Not as many as you think! y Post-coordinate indexing allows several simple controlled vocabularies to be combined, rather than using a single large pre-coordinated vocabulary.
20
The power of faceted taxonomy

4 independent categories of 10
nodes each have the same discriminatory power as one hierarchy of 10,000 nodes (104)
Easier to maintain Easier to tag by content authors Can be easier to navigate
Audience
Advocacy Contractors & Grantees Environmental Professionals Federal Facilities General Public Industry Kids Researchers & Scientists Small Business Students
Health
Advisory Exposure Food Safety Health Assessment Health Effect Health Risk Occupational Health Pesticide Effects Sun Protection Toxicity
Industry
Agriculture & Cattle Automobile Repair Chemical Dry Cleaning Electronics & Computer Energy Extractive Industries Food Processing Leather Tanning & Finishing Metal Finishing
Substance
Allergen Biological Contaminant Carcinogen Chemical Explosive Liquid Waste Microorganism Ozone Pesticide Radioactive Waste
y Its more effective to increase
the number of facets, than to increase the number of terms per facet.
21
Automatically created taxonomies

y Documents can be clustered
based on similarities and differences. y Problems:

Typically only a single
hierarchy No overall plan Results hard for people to navigate
What does North mean on this map?
22
Automatic taxonomy construction software

y Software can scan large quantities of
content and extract statistically significant words and phrases. y Example:

Archive of 10 publications analyzed for
topics related to copyright.
y Software does a poor job of De-duplication. Turning significant words and phrases
into a larger structure. Discriminating between gold and garbage.
y Software is good for Getting an understanding of the key noun
phrases in a large collection. Providing test cases for evaluating a taxonomy.
Source: Sample data courtesy of nStein.

Most popular flickr tags on 20 Feb 2007 http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/
Sort flickr categories into 5 or fewer groups. Then label each group.
Taxonomy exercise Facet grouping

y Universal taxonomy facets
By location (spatially) By time (chronologically) By type (genre) By physical properties (size, color, shape, etc.) By subject (topic)
Richard Saul Wurman. Information Architects (1996)
25
Taxonomy exercise Facet grouping
Sort flickr categories into 5 or fewer groups. Then label each group.
Todays agenda
27
Business case and motivations for taxonomies

y How are we going to use content, metadata, and
taxonomies in applications to obtain business benefits?
28
What technology analysts have said: Add metadata to search on!

y Adding metadata to unstructured content allows it to be managed like
structured content. Applications that use structured content work better.
y Enriching content with structured metadata is critical for
supporting search and personalized content delivery.
y Content that has been adequately tagged with metadata can be
leveraged in usage tracking, personalization and improved searching.
y Better structure equals better access: Taxonomy serves as a
framework for organizing the ever-growing and changing information within a company. The many dimensions of taxonomy can greatly facilitate Web site design, content management, and search engineering. If well done, taxonomy will allow for structured Web content, leading to improved information access.
29
Fundamentals of taxonomy ROI

y Tagging content using a taxonomy is a cost, not a benefit. y There is no benefit without exposing the tagged content
to users in some way that cuts costs or improves revenues. y Putting taxonomy into operation requires UI changes and/or backend system changes, as well as data changes. y You need to determine those changes, and their costs, as part of the ROI.
30
Product utilization: Taxonomy compared to search

y Conversion rate increases.
HomeDepot.com Double digit increase. 1-800-Flowers.com More than a 10% increase. Otto Group (Kaleidoscope, Freemans, Grattan, and lookagain
catalogs) 130% increase.
y Lift in average order size.
31
Product catalog: Taxonomy compared to search
Benefit: Increased conversion rate & revenue lift

Web sales net income Increased conversion rate $ Order size lift $ Potential revenue increase per year $ $ 80,000,000 30% 24,000,000 10% 8,000,000 32,000,000
32
Usability research: Taxonomy compared to search

y We found that users preferred a browsing oriented
interface for a browsing task, and a direct search interface when they knew precisely what they wanted.
Marti Hearst (and others)

y The category interface is superior to the list interface in
both subjective and objective measures.
Hao Chen & Susan Dumais
33
Usability research: Taxonomy compared to search
Category is 36% faster
Category is 48% faster
140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 C ategory List

In top 20 results Not in top 20 results
34
Source: Chen & Dumais

Median Search Time in Seconds
Time saved: Taxonomy compared to search 1 hour per day searching x 36% faster = 22 minutes each day
22 minutes x 250 working days per year = 5500 minutes or 92 hours per year
35
Time saved: Taxonomy compared to search
Benefit:
Increase service efficiency

Number of call center calls per month Average cost per call Call response costs per month Total call response costs per year Percentage of self-serviced calls due to improved information browsing Service costs savings per year $ 50,000 20
$ 1,000,000 $12,000,000 30% $ 3,600,000
36
Trusted advisers: Taxonomy avoids costs

y The amount of time wasted in futile searching for vital
information is enormous, leading to staggering costs
Sue Feldman,
y Suns usability experts calculated that 21,000 employees
were wasting an average of six minutes per day due to inconsistent intranet navigation structures. When lost time was multiplied by staff salaries, the estimated productivity loss exceeded $10M per yearabout $500 per employee per year.
Jakob Nielsen, useit.com
37
Knowledge workers spend up to 2.5 hours each day looking for information
Communicating
Searching
Creating
But find what they are looking for only 40% of the time.
Source: Kit Sims Taylor
Knowledge workers spend more time re-creating existing content than creating new content
Communicating
Searching
Recreating existing content 25%
Creating new content 8%
Source: Kit Sims Taylor (cited by Sue Feldman in her original article)
Cost saved by not recreating content
Benefit: Increase in productivity

Number of employees Average employee salary Employee costs per year Increase in productivity from not re-creating content Employee cost savings per year $ 100 80,000
$8,000,000 25% $2,000,000
40
Business case summary

1. Classifications and classification-like schemes are
being used to facilitate information seeking in the workplace, and on the web. scheme (faceted navigation) when it is made available in the user interface. User Interface.
2. Users take advantage (and prefer) this type of
3. Hierarchical or facet navigation can be guided by the 4. Facet navigation is best combined with keyword
searching. E.g., keyword search followed by faceted navigation of results.

41
Todays agenda
42
Taxonomy requires a business processes

y Taxonomies must change, gradually, over time if they are
to remain relevant. y Maintenance processes need to be specified so that the changes are based on rational cost/benefit decisions.
43
Taxonomy governance can be viewed as a standards process

y Taxonomy must evolve, but in a predictable way. y Team structure, with an appeals process
Taxonomy stewardship is part-time role at most organizations. Team needs to make decisions based on costs and benefits.
y Documentation and educational materials. y Comment-handling responsibilities (part of error-
correction process) y Issue Logs. y Release Schedule.
44
Taxonomy governance: Change process overview

2: Taxonomy Team decides when to update CV 2: NASA snapshots Taxonomy Team
Taxonomy Facets
CV Consumers
Site Search Tool
CV Sources
Subject Codes Codes
decides when to update snapshots of external CVs
Site Search Tool

Portal Portal
Taxonomy Working Copies of CVs, maintain in Tool Taxonomy Tool
Project Archives
Working Papers
NASA Expertise Competencies
CVsOther from other NASA Sources Internal
3: 3: Team adds value to Team adds value via definitions, through snapshots definitions, synonyms, synonyms, classification rules, classification rules, training materials, etc. training materials, etc. Internally Internally Created CVs Created
Web CMS
External External Standard Vocabularies Standard
4: Updated versions of CVs 4: Updated versions of CVspublished to to Consumers consumers
DMS DAM
Tagging Metatagging Tool Tool Search UI Search UI
1: External controlled vocabularies (CVs) change on their own schedule
Taxonomy NASA Taxonomy Governance Governance Environment

Environment
CV = Controlled Vocabulary
Who should build the taxonomy?

y The taxonomy (and metadata specification) should be
produced by a cross-functional team which includes business, technical, information management, and content creation stakeholders. y The team should plan on maintaining the taxonomy as well as building it.
Maintenance will not (usually) be anyones full-time job. Exact mix of people on team will change.
y It should be built in an iterative fashion, with more content
and broader review for each iteration.
46
Taxonomy governance: Generic team charter

y Taxonomy Team is responsible for maintaining:
The Taxonomy, a multi-faceted classification scheme. Associated taxonomy materials, such as: Editorial Style Guides. Taxonomy Training Materials. Metadata Standard. Team rules and procedures for change management.
y Taxonomy Team will consider costs and benefits of
suggested changes. y Taxonomy Team will:
Manage relationship between providers of source vocabularies
and consumers of the Taxonomy. Identify new opportunities for use of the Taxonomy across the enterprise to improve information management practices. Promote awareness and use of the Taxonomy.
47
Taxonomy governance team: Generic roles

Business Lead
Technical Specialist Taxonomy Specialist Content Specialist Content Owners
Keeps committee on track with larger business objectives. Balances cost/benefit issues to decide appropriate levels of effort. Obtains needed resources if those on committee cant accomplish a particular task.
Estimates costs of proposed changes in terms of amount of
data to be retagged, additional storage and processing burden, software changes, etc. Helps obtain data from various systems.
Committees liaison to content creators. Estimates costs of proposed changes in terms of editorial
process changes, additional or reduced workload, etc.

Suggests potential taxonomy changes based on analysis of
query logs, indexer feedback. Makes edits to taxonomy, installs into system with aid of IT specialist.
Reality check on process change suggestions.
48
Where taxonomy changes come from

Firewall Application UI
Application Logic
Tagging UI Content Tagging Logic
Taxonomy Query log analysis
Staff notes missing concepts Tagging Staff
End User
Recommendations by Editor 1. Small taxonomy changes (labels, synonyms) 2. Large taxonomy changes (retagging, application changes) 3. New best bets content.
Taxonomy Editor
Team Considerations 1. Business goals.

experience 2. Changes in user experience.
Taxonomy Team
3. Retagging cost.
Requests from other Requestsof NASA parts from other parts of the organization
49
Taxonomy maintenance processes

y Different organizations will need to consider their own
change processes.
Organization 1: A custodian is responsible for the content, but
checks facts with department heads before making changes. Organization 2: Analysts suggest changes, editors approve, copyeditors verify consistency. Organization 3: Marketing reps ask for a change, taxonomy editor makes demo, web representative approves it.
y Change process MUST also consider cost of
implementing the change

Retagging data. Reconfiguring auto-classifier. Retraining staff. Changes in user expectations.
50
Taxonomy maintenance workflow

Taxonomy Tool
Yes
Problem?
No
Suggest new name/category
Review new name
Copy edit new name
Add to enterprise Taxonomy
Problem?
Yes
No
Taxonomy
Analyst
Editor
Copywriter
Sys Admin
51
Sample taxonomy editor: Data Harmony

Hierarchy Browser
Standard Term Info
52
Taxonomy editing tools vendors

Most popular taxonomy editor is MS Excel
high
An immature area No vendors are in upper-right quadrant!
Ability to Execute
High functionality /high cost products ($100K+)

Niche Players Visionaries
MultiTes is widely used, cheap with
low
Completeness of Vision
53
Taxonomy maturity model

y Taxonomy governance processes must fit the organization. y As consultants, we notice different levels of maturity in the business
processes around content management, taxonomy, and metadata. y Honestly assess your organizations metadata maturity in order to design appropriate governance processes. y We are starting to define a maturity model, similar to the Software Capability Maturity Model (CMM)
Initial: Ad hoc, each project begins from scratch. Repeatable: Procedures defined and used, but not standardized across
organization or are misapplied to projects. Defined: Standard processes are tailored for project needs. Strategic training for long-range goals is in place. Managed: Projects managed using quantitative quality measures. Process itself is measured and controlled. Optimizing: Continual process improvement. Extremely accurate project estimation.
54
Purpose of maturity model

y Estimating the maturity of an organizations information
management processes tells us:

How involved the taxonomy development and maintenance
process should be
Overly sophisticated processes will fail.
What to recommend as first steps.
y Maturity is not a goal, it is a characterization of an
organizations methods for achieving particular goals. y Mature processes have expenses which must be justified by consequent cost savings or revenue gains. y IT Maturity may not be core to your business.
55
Taxonomy maturity scorecard

Initial Organizational Structure Executive Sponsorship Budgeting Hiring & Training Quality Assurance Manual Processes Automated Processes Project Management Estimating & Scheduling Cost Control Project Methodology Design and Execution Planning Design Excellence Development Maturity * * * * * * 2 * * 1 * * * Repeatable Defined Managed Optimizing
1 X is starting to examine search query logs, which is an important first step in improving search. But this is only an isolated example. 2 IT has a project methodology they are trying to use across all projects. But not all business units have project methodologies.
56
Taxonomy governance self-assessment

Background
1. Rate your organizations overall taxonomy maturity from 1 to 2. Does the search engine index more than 4 repositories
around the organization?
10.
Immature
4 5 6 Mature
10
3. Are system features and metadata fields added based on
2. What type of change was most recently made to your
cost/benefit analysis, or because they are easy to do with the current applications and tools? Cost/Benefit Easy been analyzed, or are major purchases sometimes made to use up year-end money? Requirements Year-End taxonomy positions? Yes No
organizations taxonomy management environment? Standards Tools People
4. Are applications and tools acquired after requirements have
Functionality
Data Quality
2. What is the area for your organizations taxonomy
management environment improvement? Standards Tools
5. Are there hiring and training practices for metadata and
Functionality Basic
People
Data Quality
If there is training, describe it briefly.
1. Is there a process in place to examine search query logs?
Yes
No
2. Is there an organization-wide metadata standard, such as the
Advanced
1. Are there established qualitative and quantitative measures of
Dublin Core, for use by search tools? Yes
No
metadata quality?
Yes
No
Intermediate
1. Is there an ongoing data cleansing procedure to look for any
If there are measures, describe them briefly.
redundant, obsolete or trivial content (ROT)? If there is a process, describe it briefly.
Yes
No
2. Can the CEO explain the return on investment (ROI) for
content management, search and metadata?
Yes
No
57
2005 Maturity survey: Search practices

n=87 Search Box in standard place on all web pages. Search engine indexes multiple repositories in addition to web sites. Spell Checking. Synonym Searching. Search results grouped by date, location, or other factors in addition to simple relevance score. Queries are logged and the logs are regularly examined Common queries identified, 'best' pages for those queries are found, and search engine configured to return them at the top. (Best Bets) Advanced computation of relevance based on data in addition to the text of the document. A faceted search tool, such as Endeca, has been implemented for the organization's external site or product catalog search. A faceted search tool, such as Endeca, has been implemented for the organization's internal website(s) or portal.
Not current practice
Being developed
In practice
Former practice
NA or Unknown
20% (12) 25% (15) 31% (19) 41% (25) 37% (22) 31% (19) 46% (28) 43% (26) 68% (41) 57% (34)
11% (7) 21% (13) 18% (11) 23% (14) 20% (12) 25% (15) 25% (15) 16% (10) 7% (4) 15% (9)
62% (38) 44% (27) 38% (23) 30% (18) 37% (22) 31% (19) 21% (13) 25% (15) 10% (6) 17% (10)
2% (1) 2% (1) 0% (0) 0% (0) 0% (0) 5% (3) 0% (0) 0% (0) 0% (0) 0% (0)
5% (3) 8% (5) 13% (8) 7% (4) 7% (4) 8% (5) 8% (5) 16% (10) 15% (9) 12% (7)
58
2005 Maturity survey: Metadata practices

n=87 Metadata standards are developed for the needs of each system with no overall attempt to unify them. An Organization-wide metadata standard exists and new systems consider it during development. The Organization-wide metadata standard is based on the Dublin Core. Multiple repositories comply with metadata standard. A Cataloging Policy document exists to teach people how to tag data in compliance with organizational metadata standard. The Cataloging Policy document is revised periodically. A centralized metadata repository exists to aggregate and unify metadata from disparate sources. Metadata is manually entered into web forms. Metadata is generated automatically by software. Metadata is generated automatically, then reviewed manually for correction. Not current practice Being developed In practice Former practice NA or Unknown
22% (13) 37% (22) 52% (30) 52% (31) 48% (29)
12% (7) 37% (22) 16% (9) 20% (12) 20% (12)
37% (22) 20% (12) 21% (12) 17% (10) 20% (12)
20% (12) 0% (0) 0% (0) 0% (0) 0% (0)
10% (6) 7% (4) 12% (7) 12% (7) 12% (7)
48% (29) 57% (34) 15% (9) 38% (23) 48% (29)
15% (9) 17% (10) 12% (7) 18% (11) 18% (11)
17% (10) 17% (10) 61% (36) 27% (16) 17% (10)
0% (0) 0% (0) 3% (2) 2% (1) 2% (1)
20% (12) 10% (6) 8% (5) 15% (9) 15% (9)
59
2005 Maturity survey: Taxonomy practices

n=87 Org Chart Taxonomy - One based primarily on the structure of the organization. Products Taxonomy - One based primarily on the products and/or services offered by the organization. Content Types Taxonomy - One based primarily on the different types of documents. Topical Taxonomy - One based primarily on topics of interest to the site users. Faceted Taxonomy - One which uses several of the approaches above. The Taxonomy, or a portion of it, was licensed from an outside taxonomy vendor. The Taxonomy follows a written 'style guide' to ensure its consistency over time. The Taxonomy is maintained using a taxonomy editing tool other than MS Excel. The Taxonomy was validated on a representative sample of content during its development. A Roadmap for the future evolution of the Taxonomy has been developed.
Not current practice
Being developed
In practice
Former practice
NA or Unknown
36% (21) 37% (22) 28% (16) 20% (12) 32% (19) 75% (44) 47% (28) 35% (21) 28% (17) 38% (23)
10% (6) 10% (6) 21% (12) 36% (21) 29% (17) 3% (2) 22% (13) 17% (10) 22% (13) 40% (24)
34% (20) 32% (19) 40% (23) 34% (20) 34% (20) 14% (8) 20% (12) 40% (24) 33% (20) 13% (8)
5% (3) 5% (3) 5% (3) 3% (2) 0% (0) 0% (0) 0% (0) 2% (1) 3% (2) 0% (0)
15% (9) 15% (9) 7% (4) 7% (4) 5% (3) 8% (5) 10% (6) 7% (4) 13% (8) 8% (5)
60
Todays agenda
61
Taxonomy testing methods

Method
Walk-thru
Process
Who
Requires
Rough taxonomy
Validation
Approach Appropriateness to task
Show & explain Taxonomist SME Team Taxonomist Check conformance to editorial rules Users Contextual analysis (card sorting, scenario testing, etc.) Survey Users
Walk-thru
Draft Consistent look and feel taxonomy Editorial Rules Rough taxonomy Tasks & Answers Rough Taxonomy UI Mockup Search prototype Tasks are completed successfully Time to complete task is reduced Reaction to taxonomy Reaction to new interface Reaction to search results
Usability Testing
User Satisfaction
Tagging Samples
Tag sample content with taxonomy
Taxonomist Team Indexers
Sample Content fit content Fills out content inventory Rough Training materials for people & taxonomy (or algorithms better)
62
Walk-through method Show & explain

ABC Computers.com
Content Type
Award Case Study Contract & Warranty Demo Magazine News & Event Product Information Services Solution Specification Technical Note Tool Training White Paper Other Content Types
Competency
Industry
Service
Product Family
Desktops MP3 Players Monitors Networking Notebooks Printers Projectors Servers Services Storage Televisions Other Brands
Audience
Line of Business
All Home & Home Office Gaming Government, Education & Healthcare Medium & Large Business Small Business
RegionCountry
All Asia-Pacific Canada EMEA Japan Latin America & Caribbean United States
Business & Finance Interpersonal Development IT Professionals Technical Training IT Professionals Training & Certification PC Productivity Personal Computing Proficiency
Banking & Finance Communications E-Business Education Government Healthcare Hospitality Manufacturing Petro-chemicals Retail / Wholesale Technology Transportation Other Industries
Assessment, Design & Implementation Deployment Enterprise Support Client Support Managed Lifecycle Asset Recovery & Recycling Training
All Business Employee Education Gaming Enthusiast Home Investor Job Seeker Media Partner Shopper First Time Experienced Advanced Supplier
63
Walk-through method Editorial rules consistency check

y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y
Abbreviations Ampersands Capitalization General, More, Other Languages & character sets Length limits Multiple parents Plural vs. singular form Scope notes Serial comma Sources of terms Spaces Synonyms & acronyms Term order (Alphabetic or ) Term label order (Direct vs. inverted)
Rule Name
Abbreviations
Editorial Rule
Abbreviations, other than colloquial terms and acronyms, shall not be used in term labels. Example: Public Information NOT: Public Info. The ampersand [&] character shall be used instead of the word and. Example: Licensing & Compliance NOT: Licensing and Compliance Title case capitalization shall be used. Example: Customer Service NOT: CUSTOMER SERVICE NOT: Customer service NOT: customer service
Ampersands
Capitalization
General, The term labels General, More, and More, Other Other shall be used for categories which contain content items that are not further classifiable. Example: Other Property Other Services General Information General Audience

64
Task-based testing*
* Based on Donna Maurers usability work with the Australian government
y 15 representative questions were selected Perspective of various organizational units Most frequent website searches Most frequently accessed website content Correct answers to the questions were agreed in advance by team. y 15 users were tested Did not work for the organization Represented target audiences y Testers were asked where would you look for under which facet Topic, Commodity, or Geography? Then, under which category? Then, under which sub-category? Tester choices were recorded y Testers were asked to think aloud Notes were taken on what they said y Pre- and post questions were asked Tester answers were recorded
Task-based testing Representative questions

How much cotton is imported from China? What are the impacts of mad cow" disease on U.S. meat production, sales? What is the average farm income level in your state? How much of our diet comes from fast food? How many people receive WIC benefits (Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children)? 6. How much acreage is planted to genetically engineered corn? 7. What is the cost of foodborne illness in the United States? 8. What part of food costs go to farmers, retailers? 9. Which States produce the most tobacco? 10. What percentage of farms in the United States are small farms? 11. What are the costs and benefits associated with providing more traceability in the U.S. food supply? 12. How many people in America dont get enough to eat? 13. What is behind the trade balance (surplus or deficit) in agricultural goods? 14. What is the extent of conservation compliance? How does that impact farmer's decisions? 15. What are the impacts of foreign trade restrictions on U.S. farmers, U.S. food prices?
1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Task-based testing Closed card sorting

3. What is the average farm income level in your state?
1. Topics 2. Commodities 3. Geographic Coverage
1. Topics 1.1 Agricultural Economy 1.2 Agriculture-Related Policy 1.3 Diet, Health & Safety 1.4 Farm Financial Conditions 1.5 Farm Practices & Management 1.6 Food & Agricultural Industries 1.7 Food & Nutrition Assistance 1.8 Natural Resources & Environment 1.9 Rural Economy 1.10 Trade & International Markets
1.4 1.4.1 1.4.2 1.4.3 1.4.4 1.4.5 1.4.6 1.4.7
Farm Financial Conditions Costs of Production Commodity Outlook Farm Financial Management & Performance Farm Income Farm Household Financial Well-being Lenders & Financial Markets Taxes
67
Task based testing Card sort analysis

Find-it Tasks
1. Cotton 2. Mad cow 3. Farm income 4. Fast food 5. WIC 6. GE Corn 7. Foodborne illness 8. Food costs 9. Tobacco 10. Small Farms 11. Traceability 12. Hunger 13. Trade balance 14. Conservations 15. Trade restrictions
User 1
Cotton Cattle Farm Income
User 2
Cotton Food Safety Farm Income Asia Cattle
User 3
User 4
Cotton Cattle Farm Income
User 5
Cotton Cattle Farm Income Diet Quality & Nutrition WIC Program Corn
US States
Food Consumption Diet Quality & Nutrition WIC Program Corn WIC Program Corn
Food Expenditures Diet Quality & Nutrition WIC Program Corn WIC Program Corn
Foodborne Disease Foodborne Disease Consumer Food Safety Food Prices Tobacco Farm Structure Food System Food Security Market Structure Tobacco Farm Structure Labeling Policy Food Security Market Analysis Tobacco Farm Structure Food Safety Innovations Food Security
Foodborne Disease Foodborne Disease Food Expenditures Retailing & Wholesaling Tobacco Farm Structure Tobacco Farm Structure
Food Safety Policy Food Prices Food Security Food Security Commodity Trade
Commodity Trade Trade & Intl Markets
Commodity Trade Market Analysis
Cropping Practices Conservation PolicyConservation PolicyConservation PolicyConservation Policy Trade Policy Food Safety & Trade WTO Market Analysis Commodity Trade
68
Task based testing Card sort results

y In 80% of the trials users looked for information under the
categories that we expected them to look for it. y Breaking-up topics into facets makes it easier to find information, especially information related to commodities.
69
Task based testing Card sort results

Test Questions
1. Cotton 2. Mad cow 3. Farm income 4. Fast food 5. WIC 6. GE corn 7. Foodborne illness 8. Food costs 9. Tobacco 10. Small farms 11. Traceability 12. Hunger 13. Trade balance 14. Conservation 15. Trade restrictions
% Correct % Agree
91% 73% 100% 91% 100% 100% 82% 55% 100% 91% 36% 100% 36% 91% 55% 82% 64% 55% 73% 100% 100% 82% 27% 100% 91% 18% 73% 64% 91% 36%
Possible change required. Change required.
Policy of Traceability needs to be clarified. Use quasi-synonyms.
On these trials, only 50% looked in the right category, & only 27-36% agreed on the category.
Possible error in categorization of this question because 64% thought the answer should be Commodity Trade.
70
Task-based testing User satisfaction survey

y Was it easy, medium or difficult to choose the appropriate
Topic?
Easy Medium Difficult
Commodity?
Geographic Coverage?
71
User satisfaction survey Results

More Difficult
2.00 Difficult 1.50 1.00 0.50 Topic Commodity Facet Geography
Easier
Easy
-->
72
User interface survey Which search UI is better?

y Criteria User satisfaction
Success completing tasks Confidence in results Fewer dead ends
y Methodology Design tasks from specific to

general Time performance Calculate success rates Survey subjective criteria Pay attention to survey hygiene:

Participant selection Counterbalancing T-scores
Source: Yee, Swearingen, Li, & Hearst

User interface survey Results (1)

Which Interface would you rather use for these tasks? Find images of roses Find all works from a certain period Find pictures by 2 artists in the same media Overall assessment: More useful for your usual tasks Easiest to use Most flexible More likely to result in dead-ends Helped you learn more Overall preference Google-like Baseline 4 8 6 28 1 2 Faceted Category 28 23 24 3 31 29 Google-like Baseline 15 2 1 Faceted Category 16 30 29

User interface survey Results (2)

9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
to
7.7 6.3 4.7 4.6 3.5 5.8 7.8 6.0 4.8 4.0
7.6 6.0
7.2 6.7
7.4 5.5
se U
sy Ea
m Si
e pl
e Fl
e bl xi
s ou i ed T
In
s re te
g tin Ea sy to
w ro B
se
y jo En
e bl a O w er v
m el h
g in
Google-like Baseline Faceted Category


75
Tagging samples How many items?

Goal Illustrate metadata schema Develop training documentation Qualitative test of small vocabulary (<100 categories) Number of Items 1-3 10-20 25-50 Criteria Random (excluding junk) Show typical & unusual cases Random (excluding junk)
Quantitative test of vocabularies 3-10X numberUse computer-assisted * of categories methods when more than 1020 categories. Pre-existing metadata is the most meaningful.
* Quantitative methods require large amounts of tagged content. This requires specialists, or software, to do tagging. Results may be very different than how real users would categorize content.
Tagging samples Manually tagged metadata sample

Attribute Title URL Description Jupiters Ring System http://ringmaster.arc.nasa.gov/jupiter/ Overview of the Jupiter ring system. Many images, animations and references are included for both the scientist and the public. Web Sites; Animations; Images; Reference Sources Educators; Students Ames Research Center Voyager; Galileo; Cassini; Hubble Space Telescope Jupiter Scientific and Technical Information Planetary and Lunar Science 1979-1999
77
Values
Content Types Audiences Organizations Missions & Projects Locations Business Functions Disciplines Time Period
Tagging samples Spreadsheet for tagging 10s-100s of items

1) Clickable URLs for sample content 2) Review small sample and describe 3) Drop-down for tagging (including Other entry for the unexpected
4) Flag questions
Rough bulk tagging Facet demo (1)

y Collections: 4 content sources
NTRS, SIRTF, Webb, Lessons Learned
y Taxonomy
Converted MultiTes format into RDF for Seamark
y Metadata
Converted from existing metadata on web pages, or Created using simple automatic classifier (string matching with
terms & synonyms) 250k items, ~12 metadata fields, 1.5 weeks effort
y OOTB Seamark user interface, plus logo
79
Rough bulk tagging Facet demo (2)
80
Document distribution How evenly does it divide the content?

y Documents do not distribute uniformly across categories y Zipf (1/x) distribution is expected behavior y 80/20 rule in action (actually 70/20 rule)
Measured v Expected Distribution of Top 10 Content Types in Library of Congress Database
350,000 Number of Records 300,000 250,000 200,000 150,000 100,000 50,000 0
Bi bl io gr ap hy Co ng re ss es og ra ph y Fi ct io n er at ur e ca ls M ap s itio ns Pe rio di St at is tic s
Leading candidate for splitting
Leading candidates for merging
Ex hi b
Bi
Top 10 Content Types
Ju ve ni le
lit
81
Document distribution How evenly does it divide the content?

y Methodology: 115 randomly selected URLs from corporate intranet
search index were manually categorized. Inaccessible files and junk were removed.
y Results: Slightly more uniform than Zipf distribution. Above the curve
is better than expected.

Measured v Expected Intranet Content Type Distribution
25 20 # Documents 15 10 5 0 News & Events People, Groups & Places Operations & Internal Communications Regulations, Policies, Procedures & Templates Papers & Presentations Other & Unclassified Marketing & Sales Programs, Proposals, Plans & Schedules Manuals & Learning Materials
Content Type
82
Document distribution How does taxonomy shape match that of content?

Background:
y Hierarchical taxonomies allow
Term Group Administrators Community Groups Counselors Federal Funds Recipients and Applicants Librarians News Media Other Parents and Families Policymakers Researchers School Support Staff Student Financial Aid Providers Students Teachers % Terms % Docs 7.8 2.8 3.4 9.5 2.8 0.6 7.3 2.8 4.5 2.2 2.2 1.7 27.4 25.1 15.8 1.8 1.4 34.4 1.1 3.1 2.0 6.0 11.5 3.6 0.2 0.7 7.0 11.4
comparison of fit between content and taxonomy areas
Methodology:
y 25,380 resources tagged with
taxonomy of 179 terms. (Avg. of 2 terms per resource) y Counts of terms and documents summed within taxonomy hierarchy
Results:
y Roughly Zipf distributed (top 20
terms: 79%; top 30 terms: 87%) y Mismatches between term% and document% flagged
Source: Courtesy Keith Stubbs, US. Dept. of Ed.

83
Usability testing How intuitive (repeatable) are the categorizations (1)?

y Methodology: Closed Card Sort
For alpha test of a grocery site 15 Testers put each of 71 best-selling product types into one of
10 pre-defined categories Categories where fewer than 14 of 15 testers put product into same category were flagged
84
Usability testing How intuitive (repeatable) are the categorizations (2)?
85
Usability testing How intuitive (repeatable) are the categorizations?

% of Testers 15/15 14/15 13/15 12/15 11/15 <11/15 Cumulative % of Products 54% 70% 77% 83% 85% 100% With Poly-Hierarchy 69% 83% 93% 100% 100% 100%
86
The #1 underused source of quantitative information on how to improve your taxonomy?
Query Logs & Click Trails
87
Query log & click trail examination Who are the users & what are they looking for?
y Only 30-40% of organizations regularly examine their
logs*. y Sophisticated software available, but dont wait. y 80% of value comes from basic reports
88
Query log & click trail examination Query log

UltraSeek Reporting
y Top queries y Queries with no results y Queries with no click-through y Most requested documents y Query trend analysis y Complete server usage
summary
89
Query log & click trail examination Click trail packages

y iWebTrack y NetTracker y OptimalIQ y SiteCatalyst y Visitorville y WebTrends
90
Summary Start a Measure & Improve mindset

y Taxonomy changes do not stand alone
Search system improvements Navigation improvements Content improvements Process improvements
91
Benchmarking exercise
y What are 5 representative questions that your users ask or tasks
that your users do when using your application? y Is it currently easy, medium or difficult to answer these questions or accomplish these tasks?
Rating (Easy/ Medium/Difficult)
Questions or Tasks
92
Conclusion What is a good taxonomy?

y Incremental, extensible process that identifies and y y y y
enables owners, and engages stakeholders. Quick implementation that provides measurable results as quickly as possible. A means to an end, and not the end in itself. Not perfect, but it does the job it is supposed to dosuch as improving search and navigation. Improved over time, and maintained.
93
Todays agenda
94
Tagging Overview
y Tagging is better than the words that happen to occur in a
piece of content. y All tagging is useful

End user tagging Tagging by librarians Automated tagging by OS and algorithms
y Content should be tagged throughout its lifecycle, each
time the content is handled and used so that it accrues value or its significance is diminished.
95
MS Office: File Properties
Ho wm any
peo ple f
ill t his
in?
96
Organize
Ho wm an yp eo p le
cli ck on thi s?
97
What is social tagging?

y End user tagging y Easy, intuitive tagging interfaces y Almost instantaneous feedback
Enables people to tag & re-tag content in response to seeing their tags in context with other tags.
y Emergent categories
Resembles open card sort process in which patterns emerge rather than validating categories using closed card sorts.
98
Social tagging innovators

y flickr founders
Caterina Fake Stewart Butterfield
y del.icio.us founder
Joshua Schachter
y del.icio.us & flickr are now both part of Yahoo! y As of April 2006 flickr had 130 million photos posted by 3
million registered users.
99
Four tagging rules for end users

Rule Description
Use specific terms Apply the most specific terms when tagging content. But do not tag every possible topic, just the ones that are most important or best characterize the content as a whole. Use multiple terms Use as many terms as necessary to describe overall What the content is about & Why it is important. Do not over-tag. Use appropriate terms Consider how content will be used Only fill-in the facets & values that make sense. Not all facets apply to all content. Anticipate how the content will be searched for in the future, & how to make it easy to find it. Remember that search engines can only operate on explicit information.
100
Agenda
y Content Tagging y Tagging Interface
101
Requirements for a tagging interface

y Automated form fill-in (automatically fills in known data) y Tagging precedents (see tags already assigned by y y y y y y y y y
others) Controlled vocabularies, e.g., with pull-down list Multi-valued tags Geo-tagging Group tagging Clean-up tag tools, e.g., alpha list Batch editing Share/Dont share (Public/Private) Identified owner (who can be emailed) Almost immediate feedback, e.g., tag cloud
102
Form fill-in: Automatically filled-in known data
103
Manual form fill-in w/ check boxes, pull-down lists, etc.
Auto keyword & summarization
104

Auto-categorization Rules & pattern matching
Parse & lookup (recognize names)
105
Tagging precedents: See tags assigned by others
106
Multi-valued group tagging
107
Group geo-tagging
108
Group geo-tagging
109
Clean up tag tools: Alpha list
110
Batch edit
111
Share or dont share tagging
112
Bulk tagging
y ID collection of related content items by pattern or context y Then, apply same attributes to all content items
113
Tag a folder
y Drag & drop content items into folder y Then, content items inherit properties of folder
114
Workflow
y Approve & improve mindset
Create Content Review & Improve
Add Metadata Review & Improve
Publish
115
Interactive rewards
y Almost instantaneous exposure of tags in simple user
interfaces on the web provides positive reinforcement for user tagging that simply did not exist before. y For example,
Most popular Tag clouds Alerts
116
Most popular
Another example is most emailed from, e.g., the NY
Times.
117
Tag cloud
118
Alerts
y New (content selected by date) y Subscriptions (content selected by tags) y Interest (content selected by other people) y Individual (content selected for you by other people)
119
Taxonomy Strategies
LLC
Is faceted indexing the future of social tagging?
6-15 June 2007
Tagging exercise: Blog tagging (a)
ALA Tech Source. http://www.techsource.ala.org/blog/2007/04/google-buys-oclc-announces-new-products.html

Tagging exercise: Blog tagging (b)
HBSP. http://discussionleader.hbsp.com/davenport/2007/04/cause_and_effect_reporting_raw.html#comments
Tagging exercise: Taxonomy facetsdefinitions

Taxonomy Facets Business activity Industry / Product Geography Organization Person / Role Content Type Audience Topic Descriptions Use for common business function or activity such as finance, marketing and sales. Use for content that is about or related to an industrial sector or product such as construction equipment. Use for content that is about a region, country or city. Use for named organizations, brands and business entities. Use for named people and the roles people have in organizations. Use for content genres such as letters, memos and reports. Use to indicate the intended audience. Use for other business and associated topics that the content is about or related to.
123
Tagging exercise: Taxonomy facetsvalues

Business activity Geography Industry / Product Organization / Entity People / Role Content Type Audience
Accounting Auditing Finance HR management IT Marketing Operations management Sales
Africa Americas Antarctica Asia Europe Oceania Global Historical geography Oceans & seas Regions
Agriculture Mining Utilities Construction Manufacturing Wholesale trade Retail trade Transportation & warehousing Information Finance & insurance Real estate Professional Management Administrative support Education Health care Arts, entertainment & recreation Accommodation & food Other services Public administration
Business entities Companies & brands Government agencies International NGOs Organization types
Business Leaders Thought Leaders Political Leaders Roles
Basic facts & information Blog Brochure Database E-mail Letter Memo Multimedia Report Newsletter Podcast Press Release Research & Analysis RSS Feed
Consumer Employee Manager Executive
Taxonomy Facets Business activity Industry / Product Geography Organization Person / Role Content Type Audience
Tags
Topic
124
Summary
y There are lessons to be learned from web tagging about
how to get good metadata in document and content management applications. y Document and content management system tagging must be simple, and it must be almost instantaneously easier to find relevant work products.
125
Taxonomy Strategies
LLC
Questions?
Joseph A. Busch + 415-377-7912 jbusch@taxonomystrategies.com http://www.taxonomystrategies.com
6-15 June 2007

Taxonomy & Metadata Strategies For Effective Content Management

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Taxonomy & Metadata Strategies For Effective Content Management

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Taxonomy Strategies

Taxonomy & metadata strategies for effective content management

6-15 June 2007

Copyright 2007 Taxonomy Strategies LLC. All rights reserved.

Taxonomy Strategies LLC The business of organized

Who I am: Joseph Busch

Program Manager, Getty Foundation Manager, Pricewaterhouse

Taxonomy Strategies LLC The business of organized

For us, taxonomy work includes:

and hierarchical, some are small and flat.

Recent & current projects: http://www.taxonomystrategies.com/html/clients.htm Government Commercial

Taxonomy Strategies LLC The business of organized

Who are you? What sectors do you work in?

y High Tech Computers, Software & Telecommunications y Heavy Manufacturing

Taxonomy Strategies LLC The business of organized

Why are you here?

Taxonomy Strategies LLC The business of organized

Taxonomy Strategies LLC The business of organized

The main issue: What goes here?

Taxonomy Strategies LLC The business of organized

Seven phases of taxonomy development

7 Test & Train

Taxonomy Strategies LLC The business of organized

Taxonomy design phases need to be iterated

Alpha Dev & Test

Identify, gather & review resources

Define fields & purpose

Modify for 1.0

Revise, use in alpha CMS

alpha workflows in CMS

7 Test & Train

Use alpha CMS to tag larger sample

Use beta CMS to tag larger sample

Finalize training materials & train staff

Taxonomy Strategies LLC The business of organized

Licensing an existing taxonomy

Taxonomy Strategies LLC The business of organized

Free sources for 8 common taxonomies

Business Activity Topic Audience

Products & Services

Taxonomy Strategies LLC The business of organized

Typical product catalog: A-Z, then idiosyncratic categories

Taxonomy Strategies LLC The business of organized

How to analyze existing product catalog categories: Principles and priorities

Taxonomy Strategies LLC The business of organized

Product categories example: Wireless carrier

Taxonomy Strategies LLC The business of organized

Product attributes example: Digital cameras in an electronics catalog

y Types of attributes Generic attributes

3 Megapixels (4) 4 Megapixels (5) 5 Megapixels (27) 6-8 Megapixels (21)

Faceted taxonomy theory & practice

Taxonomy Strategies LLC The business of organized

The power of faceted taxonomy

y Its more effective to increase

Taxonomy Strategies LLC The business of organized

Automatically created taxonomies

based on similarities and differences. y Problems:

hierarchy No overall plan Results hard for people to navigate

What does North mean on this map?

Taxonomy Strategies LLC The business of organized

Automatic taxonomy construction software

content and extract statistically significant words and phrases. y Example: