Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
Planning a Semantic Web site
ibm.com — The Semantic Web brings with it the opportunities for users to get smarter search results, and for site owners to get more targeted traffic as users find what they really want. But these benefits don't just magically appear. This article leads you through the aspects of both information architecture and general infrastructure you need in place to t
bonlebon- 619 diggs
- digg it
- RyeBrye, on 04/12/2008, -3/+11Excellent article... I like this part about making sure your URLs are semantically helpful:
"...The page you are shown is determined by some rather cryptic information in the query string. For instance, the URI of the widget might be: http://www.mysite.com/inventory.cgi?pid=12345 and the URI of the doodad might be: http://www.mysite.com/inventory.cgi?pid=67890.
Suddenly the URI gives you very little semantic value. It's certainly not clear that these two products might be in the same category"
The funny part is the URL this page is located at is:
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-pl ...- fkr3, on 04/12/2008, -8/+3There is no such thing as "user friendly" urls. There never was. They were *always* designed for search engines and I'd be amazed if search engines give any extra points for stuffing keywords in urls anymore.
If anyone wants to know what the page is they're going to look at the page title or the page itself not the address bar. If they want to remember it they bookmark it. If they want to send it to someone else they cut & paste it from the address bar and drop it straight into [messenger] or an email.- Sibre, on 04/12/2008, -2/+3This isn't always true. I know plenty of people who remember URL's because they were easy and made sense, rather than full of a bunch of query strings that nobody but the developer would be able to decipher.
- fkr3, on 04/12/2008, -1/+2People don't type in urls. They get them from Google or a website as a link they can click on, they get them as a cut & pasted link in their email or im program etcetera. People would rather do a google search for "cnn.com" instead of just typing cnn.com.
I know Google trends is hardly a source worth citing but:
http://google.com/trends?q=google.com%2C+cnn.com%2 ...
People are inherently stupid. They need links to click on not a url to type, and when they have to type a url they punch it in to a search engine so the link can be generated for them. They have some weird phobia about moving the mouse just a few inches higher and typing yahoo.com into the address bar instead of the google search box. We've all seen our workmates, friends and family doing this. We've all pointed out they could just type it in the address bar and get there quicker.
User friendly urls are and always were a keyword-stuffing technique engaged for search engines, not people.
- fkr3, on 04/12/2008, -1/+2People don't type in urls. They get them from Google or a website as a link they can click on, they get them as a cut & pasted link in their email or im program etcetera. People would rather do a google search for "cnn.com" instead of just typing cnn.com.
- Sibre, on 04/12/2008, -2/+3This isn't always true. I know plenty of people who remember URL's because they were easy and made sense, rather than full of a bunch of query strings that nobody but the developer would be able to decipher.
- fkr3, on 04/12/2008, -8/+3There is no such thing as "user friendly" urls. There never was. They were *always* designed for search engines and I'd be amazed if search engines give any extra points for stuffing keywords in urls anymore.
- Burdell1, on 04/12/2008, -17/+8I thought it meant planning a 'pro-jew' website at first glance;)
- TheJayman, on 04/12/2008, -1/+6It would be interesting to see what infrastructure it takes for a site like Digg to be run
- RyeBrye, on 04/12/2008, -1/+11A bunch of commodity PHP servers that don't sync very well. Probably looks something like this:
http://stokkeland.net/jts/images/basement.jpg - fatjoe, on 04/13/2008, -2/+1LOL RyeBrye. I navigated to the main page of that url and read the guys life story
http://stokkeland.machinecontrol.net/jts/
"Born 1972 in southern Norway... 4 years education and apprenticeship, technical college.. Engaged to American June 1998. Moved to USA May 1999. Married July 1999. Employed by local company August 1999. Bought a house in August 2001."
LOL - kowalzki, on 04/13/2008, -0/+1a dog, a cofee maker machine, nintedo wii and pizza
- RyeBrye, on 04/12/2008, -1/+11A bunch of commodity PHP servers that don't sync very well. Probably looks something like this:
- RyeBrye, on 04/12/2008, -11/+6Note to digg: Your comment system is still broken...
- hpfreak26, on 04/13/2008, -0/+1Just because you're always getting buried doesn't mean that it's not working right.
- Bersy, on 04/12/2008, -7/+0O RLY?
- Sauratos, on 04/12/2008, -13/+3When I first saw this title, I though it said "Semitic". I though that was a little racy...
- MtheoryX, on 04/12/2008, -2/+1lurn two reads?
- dlllb, on 04/12/2008, -15/+3Yeah, release this information so spammers (read: assholes and bots) can manipulate the methods and continue to survive. Buried.
- MtheoryX, on 04/12/2008, -2/+7You're buried for being completely nonsensical.
- dlllb, on 04/13/2008, -0/+1I bury you for supporting irrational and non-methodical thought.
- jabz, on 04/14/2008, -0/+1I bury you for thinking that way...insane.
- dlllb, on 04/13/2008, -0/+1I bury you for supporting irrational and non-methodical thought.
- MtheoryX, on 04/12/2008, -2/+7You're buried for being completely nonsensical.
- Shadow120, on 04/12/2008, -15/+2JEWS = BAD NEWS
- bryxal, on 04/12/2008, -7/+2oh come on thats gold
- bonjourmr, on 04/25/2008, -6/+1I read that as Planning anti-somatic website. Continue.
- sgtpppr, on 04/12/2008, -0/+3Wow, that is a good article. Usually any article dealing with semantic development is really ambiguous or not very detailed. Great reference and has a bunch of good resources.
- ell0bo, on 04/12/2008, -0/+2Anyone else notice that 'Listing 4. Contact Information using vCard' isn't even compliant? I mean, perhaps I'm a tight ass, shouldn't you make sure your example code validates?
Good article though. - xaeon, on 04/12/2008, -0/+3It's nice to see that information about the Semtantic Web is actually getting out there into the public domain. It'll be great to see in a few years what people have actually done to it. I was taught about the Semantic Web for my Artificial Intelligence degree and it kinda seemed like a pipe-dream at the time.
I hope something actually comes of it though. The REAL Web 2.0. - peterinjapan, on 04/13/2008, -3/+1It must be too early for me. I thought it said "semitic" website. Zionism FTW!
- Matt2k, on 04/13/2008, -1/+4Semantic web is nonsense, because it depends on people putting for the effort to legitimately mark up their content in a way that makes sense and is not disingenuous. If you truly feel that marking up your content in a STRONG tag is going to give you better results than a CSS tagged DIV or (heaven forbid) a B tag, you are in for a rude awakening. Search engines goals of being independent of end user maniuplation is completely opposite of yours. The only real end goal is true language comprehension by machines, and you are not a part of that.
- ramsinks.com, on 04/13/2008, -2/+1Semantic sucks.
- dakellog, on 04/13/2008, -0/+5Is it just me or does the Semantic Web seem like a bunch of hot air? The semantic web predates Web 2.0, but was labeled Web 3.0. When an idea is good, it grows a lot faster than this. The Semantic Web is fighting history. Once upon a time, Yahoo! had a popular structured index full of semantic information. It was soundly defeated by Altavista, Inktomi, and finally Google. Google won by looking at amorphous, unstructured data and finding patterns. Amorphous wins because there is just more of it. Volume beats organization. If the Semantic Web were to win, billions of unlabeled pages will have to be marked up with accurate information. That is not going to happen. Here's a good article to counter this pablum. http://davidkellogg.com/blog/2007/11/05/semantic-w ...
- funkywood, on 04/13/2008, -0/+1It needs to reach a critical mass to be useful but no-one can be bothered to use it until it is. We should start by making all the links on Wikipedia semantic. So the link from George W Bush to George H Bush would say 'father'.
Then you could query wikipedia for things like find me all the grandchildren of the original Neocons who are gay. It would be the ultimate database of knowledge that Berners Lee talks about.
Feed that knowledge in Google and the semantic web might just take off.
- funkywood, on 04/13/2008, -0/+1It needs to reach a critical mass to be useful but no-one can be bothered to use it until it is. We should start by making all the links on Wikipedia semantic. So the link from George W Bush to George H Bush would say 'father'.
- MrViklund, on 04/13/2008, -0/+1Interesting.
- jabz, on 04/14/2008, -0/+1Although the article does not go deep, it`s good for a rough idea of the semantic web. The author should have offered more independent links to furthergoing resources.
- habenneas, on 04/15/2008, -0/+1Fast, text-only mirror: http://www.lynxcache.org/usr/1/Planning_a_Semantic ...
- habenneas, on 04/15/2008, -0/+1Text-only mirror: http://www.lynxcache.org/usr/1/Planning_a_Semantic ...
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by
