[Sigia-l] Re: Sigia-l Digest, Vol 2, Issue 23 (Out of office)
ALBERT LUKBAN
Albert.Lukban at slma.com
Sat Nov 20 12:02:03 EST 2004
Thank you for your email. I will be out of the office until the morning
of 11/22 and will not be able to regularly access my email account.
If you need immediate assistance, please contact Michael Garvey at
703/984-5372.
Thanks!
Albert
>>> sigia-l 11/20/04 12:00 >>>
Send Sigia-l mailing list submissions to
sigia-l at asis.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigia-l
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
sigia-l-request at asis.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
sigia-l-owner at asis.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Sigia-l digest..."
Searchable list archive: http://www.info-arch.org/lists/sigia-l/
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Sigia-l Digest, Vol 2, Issue 22 (Out of office)
(ALBERT LUKBAN)
2. Re: Google Scholar (Manu Sharma)
3. Re: Google Scholar (Andrew Boyd)
4. Re: Google Scholar (Manu Sharma)
5. JOB: DHTML DEVELOPER - Wrapsidy - Los Gatos, CA
(subimage interactive)
6. RE: Kano Analysis (Boniface Lau)
7. RE: Kano Analysis (Boniface Lau)
8. Re: Kano Analysis (Eric Scheid)
9. Re: Kano Analysis and the prioritisation matrix (Eric Scheid)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 12:02:04 -0500
From: "ALBERT LUKBAN" <Albert.Lukban at slma.com>
Subject: [Sigia-l] Re: Sigia-l Digest, Vol 2, Issue 22 (Out of office)
To: <sigia-l at asis.org>
Message-ID: <s19de0c9.085 at fshm2.usagroup.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Thank you for your email. I will be out of the office until the morning
of 11/22 and will not be able to regularly access my email account.
If you need immediate assistance, please contact Michael Garvey at
703/984-5372.
Thanks!
Albert
>>> sigia-l 11/19/04 12:00 >>>
Send Sigia-l mailing list submissions to
sigia-l at asis.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigia-l
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
sigia-l-request at asis.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
sigia-l-owner at asis.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Sigia-l digest..."
Searchable list archive: http://www.info-arch.org/lists/sigia-l/
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Google Scholar (Tanya Rabourn)
2. Re: Google Scholar (Karl Fast)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 10:25:20 -0500
From: Tanya Rabourn <tanya at pixelcharmer.com>
Subject: Re: [Sigia-l] Google Scholar
To: Donna Timara <tdonna at gmail.com>
Message-ID: <67F3CC07-3A3F-11D9-8FD3-000A27DD04FC at pixelcharmer.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252; format=flowed
On Nov 18, 2004, at 12:28 PM, Donna Timara wrote:
> What value does it add, looking at Google does not own any database of
> Scholarly content?
>
> I am comparing it with some of the already established ones - Factiva
> for business/financial, ACM for HCI, HBR etc... Is the search
> capability that big a deal?
>
> I am sure it is good for Open Access Journals, but then what's the
> difference with what was Google search before. I want to understand
> why this is making headlines today.
>
It's just the packaging of something that was actually worthy of some
headlines (but not limited to google). I'm sure you've heard about
efforts to get at the "deep web" which include some of the resources
you mention. Even though the free access might be limited to just the
citation and abstract, that's still valuable. However I think the big
deal was probably the addition of Worldcat a few months ago.
"All of OCLC's WorldCat Heading Toward the Open Web"
http://www.infotoday.com/newsbreaks/nb041011-2.shtml
-Tanya
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 10:36:32 -0600
From: Karl Fast <karl.fast at pobox.com>
Subject: Re: [Sigia-l] Google Scholar
To: sigia-l at asis.org
Message-ID: <20041119103632.P31603 at signal.lights.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> What value does it add, looking at Google does not own any database
> of Scholarly content?
Google Scholar does to the academic literature what Google News does
to current events information.
It adds value in a number of ways.
The scientific literature has a specific and explicit structure that
could be algorithmically identified and extracted. The big items
would be names of authors, institutions, journals, conferences, and
paper titles.
There is also the reference list which you can cross-reference
against the rest of the database.
By subsetting this material from the master index, you can develop
some unique features and ranking algorithms that exploit this
structure. Google provides a master interface to the "universe of
knowledge" but sometimes you want to start by filtering out a large
portion of that.
You can also add search features relevant to this subset without
polluting the master set. For example, you can do a name: search in
Google scholar to find papers by a particular author. They could
develop a rich search syntax relevant to scientific literature
without it confusing the normal Google search syntax.
This is not a new idea.
Citeseer already crawls the web for scientific literature and builds
a searchable index. Very useful. I use it regularly.
http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/
Google Scholar seems to be a competitor to this. Some diffs
- It doesn't offer the same feature set as Citeseer (yet).
- I don't know how the sizes compare. Citeseer has been around
longer, but Google has more resources
- Google Scholar will be more reliable and accessible. Citeseer
is occassionally unavailable because too many people are using it
- Google has a branding edge, as mentioned
--karl
http://www.livingskies.com/
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Sigia-l mailing list
Sigia-l at asis.org
http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigia-l
End of Sigia-l Digest, Vol 2, Issue 22
**************************************
This E-Mail has been scanned for viruses.
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 23:54:50 +0530
From: "Manu Sharma" <manu at orangehues.com>
Subject: Re: [Sigia-l] Google Scholar
To: "Karl Fast" <karl.fast at pobox.com>, "Sigia-L at Asis. Org"
<sigia-l at asis.org>
Message-ID: <003e01c4ce65$2178cc40$7662fea9 at ma>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/
>
> Google Scholar seems to be a competitor to this. Some diffs
>
> - It doesn't offer the same feature set as Citeseer (yet).
>
> - I don't know how the sizes compare. Citeseer has been around
> longer, but Google has more resources
>
> - Google Scholar will be more reliable and accessible. Citeseer
> is occassionally unavailable because too many people are using it
>
> - Google has a branding edge, as mentioned
All this. But the biggest difference that's instantly apparent is that
Google Scholar is amazingly fast. About ten times faster than CiteSeer
from where I use it. On CS, I get errors such as "service temporarily
unavailable", "down for repairs" or "too many users" all too often.
Google results on the other hand take less than two seconds to appear.
Manu.
http://orangehues.com/blog
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 06:46:44 +1100
From: Andrew Boyd <andrew_db at bigpond.com>
Subject: Re: [Sigia-l] Google Scholar
To: Manu Sharma <manu at orangehues.com>
Cc: "Sigia-L at Asis. Org" <sigia-l at asis.org>
Message-ID: <419E4DA4.7010205 at bigpond.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Manu Sharma wrote:
>> All this. But the biggest difference that's instantly apparent is
that
>>Google Scholar is amazingly fast. About ten times faster than CiteSeer
>>from where I use it. On CS, I get errors such as "service temporarily
>>unavailable", "down for repairs" or "too many users" all too often.
>>
>>Google results on the other hand take less than two seconds to appear.
>>
>>Manu.
>>http://orangehues.com/blog
>>
>>
>>
>>
Hi Manu,
you have hit the nail right on the head! Yes! :)
I can see it now.. for all its supposed or actual flaws, google is fast!
That is what drew me to it in the first place. I would be willing to bet
that is why the majority of people use it today.
The results may not be 100% the best available, but they probably work
for most of the people, most of the time.
Thanks, Andrew
_________________________________________
Andrew Boyd
Business Development Manager
Daily Basis P/L
Phone 02 6282 9797 or 02 4885 1357
Mobile 0412 641 074
Email andrew at dailybasis.com.au
or andrew_db at bigpond.com
_________________________________________
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 01:49:04 +0530
From: "Manu Sharma" <manu at orangehues.com>
Subject: Re: [Sigia-l] Google Scholar
To: "Andrew Boyd" <andrew_db at bigpond.com>
Cc: "Sigia-L at Asis. Org" <sigia-l at asis.org>
Message-ID: <00ab01c4ce75$05f8bf60$7662fea9 at ma>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> Hi Manu,
>
> you have hit the nail right on the head! Yes! :)
>
> I can see it now.. for all its supposed or actual flaws, google is
fast! That is what drew me to it in the first place. I would be willing
to bet that is why the majority of people use it today.
I agree completely.
Despite all the talk of competition, the fact is, Google remains the
fastest search engine of all. Significantly faster than Y! and MSN.
(I've actually done tests in the past to measure the difference). I
believe too that it's one of the top two (and the most underrated)
reasons behind the Google success story.
Btw, just noticed that unlike CiteSeer, Google Scholar also includes
book results.
Manu.
http://orangehues.com/blog
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 14:58:34 -0800
From: subimage interactive <subimage at gmail.com>
Subject: [Sigia-l] JOB: DHTML DEVELOPER - Wrapsidy - Los Gatos, CA
To: sigia-l at asis.org
Message-ID: <7aff9b4c041119145853e9a4fb at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
EXPERIENCED DHTML DEVELOPER
Wrapsidy, a 10 year old Los Gatos-based software company, is the
leading company providing TV ratings analysis software, with a Who's
Who list of clients in the TV industry. We are looking for developers
to help us build a high-availability, high transaction rate ratings
portal. We are developing an advanced user interface that feels more
like a desktop application than browsing the web. We are seeking an
experienced DHTML developer to join our advanced client and server
side development team.
Send your cover letter, resume and samples of your work to:
sb-dhtml1 at wrap.com.
Responsibilities
- Work with our team to implement a usable & visually attractive
interface for a portal-based TV ratings analysis and reporting system.
- Collaborate with the development team to develop complex DHTML pages
that will serve as templates for the dynamic, data-driven portions of
the portal.
Required Skills and Experience
- Over 3 years of solid hand-coded DHTML development experience,
including experience with dynamic, data-driven business web sites.
- Solid JavaScript skills, particularly an understanding of the W3C
DOM and manipulation of DOM elements.
- Excellent understanding of CSS, including CSS positioning.
- Experience with cross-browser compatibility (Mozilla/Gecko & IE 5.5+).
- Experience using IFRAMES and hidden elements to provide more
responsive interaction without additional page refreshes.
- Experience with Photoshop, Illustrator, Flash, or Freehand a plus.
- XUL experience is a plus.
- A general interest in all areas of web application development is a
plus.
- Must be able to independently design, develop and test major
features, as well as work jointly with other team members to deliver
complex changes.
- Strong written and verbal communication skills.
H1B sponsorship is not available.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLYING: Please copy and paste your resume into the
BODY of an email (do not attach a file) or provide a link. EMAILS
WITH ATTACHMENTS WILL NOT BE REVIEWED.
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 21:59:03 -0500
From: "Boniface Lau" <boniface_lau at compuserve.com>
Subject: RE: [Sigia-l] Kano Analysis
To: "'sigia l'" <sigia-l at asis.org>
Message-ID: <000801c4ceac$e6e91bf0$8119fea9 at amazon>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> From: Eric Scheid
>
> The designer can take a guess as to which features will produce
> satisfaction, but without some feedback from the users (eg. KA
ISTM you are confusing KA with user feedback.
> or UE) then it is just a shot in the dark, perhaps guided by "best
> practices".
>
> Say you're designing two different models of cars: one for the young
> singleton, one for adults with young families. They both might have
> "it must be fun to drive long distances" as a requirement (the
> summer break roadtrip to florida for college kids, vs the annual
> pilgrimage to disneyland for the family). I know you wouldn't
> suggest that both models should have the same features, I know
> you're not that stupid.
But you're wrong, due to your own self-imposed limitation. In
exploring design alternatives, I do not exclude the possibility that
both models can meet their requirements with the same features. After
all, there is nothing stating that both models cannot have the same
features. Good designers know the real boundaries.
Good designers also have the necessary confidence to ride the design
process exploring what seems like stupid things to others. Thus, being
"that stupid" is sometimes the precondition for coming up with a smart
design, e.g. one that allows both car models to meet their requirement
with the same features.
>
> How do you determine which features produce the most satisfaction
> payoff for each group, thus meeting that requirement?
Validation.
>
> I won't give you a hint, mmm'KAy.
That reminded me of the saying, "When all you've got is a hammer,
everything looks like a nail."
Boniface
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 21:59:54 -0500
From: "Boniface Lau" <boniface_lau at compuserve.com>
Subject: RE: [Sigia-l] Kano Analysis
To: "'sigia l'" <sigia-l at asis.org>
Message-ID: <000901c4cead$045ca120$8119fea9 at amazon>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> From: Andrew Boyd
>
> Boniface Lau wrote:
>
> >User satisfaction is a factor in determining requirement.
> >
> >By meeting the requirement, one achieves user satisfaction.
>
> I would have said something like "By meeting properly defined and
> user-derived requirements, an atmosphere is created where user
> satisfaction with the specific application is made possible".
"Made possible" indeed. User satisfaction is the here-and-now. Nothing
before guarantees it. Even when a person is satisfied in one moment,
it does not mean that the same person will also satisfy in the very
next moment within the same environment. Ah, that grey stuff in our
head is slippery...
Boniface
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 16:25:24 +1100
From: Eric Scheid <eric.scheid at ironclad.net.au>
Subject: Re: [Sigia-l] Kano Analysis
To: sigia l <sigia-l at asis.org>
Message-ID: <BDC52074.39B42%eric.scheid at ironclad.net.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
On 20/11/04 1:59 PM, "Boniface Lau" <boniface_lau at compuserve.com> wrote:
>> The designer can take a guess as to which features will produce
>> satisfaction, but without some feedback from the users (eg. KA
>
> ISTM you are confusing KA with user feedback.
Well, KA is one method for getting feedback from users on a collection
of
features. There are other methods of getting feedback. I said "eg.", not
"ie.".
If KA is not an example of "feedback", what would you call it?
>> I won't give you a hint, mmm'KAy.
>
> That reminded me of the saying, "When all you've got is a hammer,
> everything looks like a nail."
KA was specifically developed by Dr. Noriaki Kano of Tokyo Rika
University
for evaluating features*. I want to use a hammer to pound a nail, but it
is
you who wants to use a hammer to open jam jars ... your quaint aphorism
doesn't really apply to me, now does it?
e.
* if you read the literature you might see these features referred to as
"requirements", but then when the literature goes on to provide examples
they are all features or attributes, not things which match your
definition
of "requirements"
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 16:46:19 +1100
From: Eric Scheid <eric.scheid at ironclad.net.au>
Subject: [Sigia-l] Re: Kano Analysis and the prioritisation matrix
To: sigia l <sigia-l at asis.org>
Cc: Brett Lider <Brett.Lider at aa-rf.com>
Message-ID: <BDC5255B.39B56%eric.scheid at ironclad.net.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
On 19/11/04 5:36 AM, "Brett Lider" <Brett.Lider at aa-rf.com> wrote:
> I see it as a way to segregate baseline requirements from "make it
really
> good" requirements. Most of the time, we collect requirements in an
> spreadsheet and group them and rank them according to business
priority,
> technical difficulty, and user priority. But an important item in user
> priority might be a baseline requirement or an exceeds requirement. So
adding
> a field or some way to capture that would be good.
(from off-list, but with permission to post)
I also think the results from KA is what would go into the user priority
column. You wouldn't really need to bother prioritising the "expected
must
haves", but you would with the "more is better" and the "unexpected
delights".
I think it would also have some impact on determining the technical
difficulty rating ... knowing that some feature is a "must have" means
you
know you only need implement to the baseline depth, and not fuss and
worry
about over engineering and optimising it.
e.
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Sigia-l mailing list
Sigia-l at asis.org
http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigia-l
End of Sigia-l Digest, Vol 2, Issue 23
**************************************
This E-Mail has been scanned for viruses.
More information about the Sigia-l
mailing list