<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Designing for Faceted Search</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thenoisychannel.com/2009/05/09/designing-for-faceted-search/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thenoisychannel.com/2009/05/09/designing-for-faceted-search/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 05:21:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Will Evans</title>
		<link>http://thenoisychannel.com/2009/05/09/designing-for-faceted-search/comment-page-1/#comment-3085</link>
		<dc:creator>Will Evans</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 May 2009 13:37:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thenoisychannel.com/?p=2070#comment-3085</guid>
		<description>Good point. I was thinking it depends on the type and size of data your searching and the complexity of the objects that are returned as well as associated assets (like photos in ecommerce). I have a designing for faceted search presentation that focuses just on design/usability factors which does run close to 80 slides - so I realize that you could probably write a good size book on the subject. Maybe I should back away from being too critical.
Btw: Kayak in both alpha and beta versions loaded the entire &gt;300 typical results set into a javascript array which is what allowed for relatively quick sorting and filtering by facets.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good point. I was thinking it depends on the type and size of data your searching and the complexity of the objects that are returned as well as associated assets (like photos in ecommerce). I have a designing for faceted search presentation that focuses just on design/usability factors which does run close to 80 slides &#8211; so I realize that you could probably write a good size book on the subject. Maybe I should back away from being too critical.<br />
Btw: Kayak in both alpha and beta versions loaded the entire &gt;300 typical results set into a javascript array which is what allowed for relatively quick sorting and filtering by facets.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Daniel Tunkelang</title>
		<link>http://thenoisychannel.com/2009/05/09/designing-for-faceted-search/comment-page-1/#comment-3084</link>
		<dc:creator>Daniel Tunkelang</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 May 2009 13:23:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thenoisychannel.com/?p=2070#comment-3084</guid>
		<description>Fair point. For example, a client-side approach like &lt;a href=&quot;http://simile.mit.edu/wiki/Exhibit&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Exhibit&lt;/a&gt; does everything through JavaScript in the browser. And other implementations take a similar approach using Java applets. Of course, one can argue that they do &quot;submit a query&quot;, only that it&#039;s handled locally rather than on the original server.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fair point. For example, a client-side approach like <a href="http://simile.mit.edu/wiki/Exhibit" rel="nofollow">Exhibit</a> does everything through JavaScript in the browser. And other implementations take a similar approach using Java applets. Of course, one can argue that they do &#8220;submit a query&#8221;, only that it&#8217;s handled locally rather than on the original server.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Will Evans</title>
		<link>http://thenoisychannel.com/2009/05/09/designing-for-faceted-search/comment-page-1/#comment-3083</link>
		<dc:creator>Will Evans</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 May 2009 13:16:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thenoisychannel.com/?p=2070#comment-3083</guid>
		<description>I found the article okay; but not as deep as I would have like to have seen with real UI/Design recommendations for facets, location, display, disclosure - which it seemed short on. 
I did disagree with this assertion: &quot;As users combine facet values, the search engine is really launching a new search based on the selected values&quot;
This is not necessarily true - it really depends on what search engine you are using - some implementations I have seen do not submit another query. One I have actually worked on definitely does not submit another search with selected values.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I found the article okay; but not as deep as I would have like to have seen with real UI/Design recommendations for facets, location, display, disclosure &#8211; which it seemed short on.<br />
I did disagree with this assertion: &#8220;As users combine facet values, the search engine is really launching a new search based on the selected values&#8221;<br />
This is not necessarily true &#8211; it really depends on what search engine you are using &#8211; some implementations I have seen do not submit another query. One I have actually worked on definitely does not submit another search with selected values.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Daniel Tunkelang</title>
		<link>http://thenoisychannel.com/2009/05/09/designing-for-faceted-search/comment-page-1/#comment-3081</link>
		<dc:creator>Daniel Tunkelang</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 May 2009 12:20:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thenoisychannel.com/?p=2070#comment-3081</guid>
		<description>I think you mean 2^15 = 32,768 if you&#039;re counting all possible ORs within a facet--unless you mean to count order. Of course, at that point we&#039;re just counting subsets of value, ignoring the fact that they&#039;re in distinct facets.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think you mean 2^15 = 32,768 if you&#8217;re counting all possible ORs within a facet&#8211;unless you mean to count order. Of course, at that point we&#8217;re just counting subsets of value, ignoring the fact that they&#8217;re in distinct facets.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Max L. Wilson</title>
		<link>http://thenoisychannel.com/2009/05/09/designing-for-faceted-search/comment-page-1/#comment-3080</link>
		<dc:creator>Max L. Wilson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 May 2009 08:50:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thenoisychannel.com/?p=2070#comment-3080</guid>
		<description>I would say that you are both wrong (oooo burn), as in some faceted systems, users would be able to make up to 5 selections in all three facets. such as wanting to see indian OR thai slow-cooker dinner recipes (from the articles chosen theme of example). is that 5!^3? that would be 360 combinations.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would say that you are both wrong (oooo burn), as in some faceted systems, users would be able to make up to 5 selections in all three facets. such as wanting to see indian OR thai slow-cooker dinner recipes (from the articles chosen theme of example). is that 5!^3? that would be 360 combinations.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

