On Aug 3, 2009, at 4:33 PM, Sean Owen wrote:
Yes I think that is the meaning, and I don't intend to 'expand' along
these lines (by myself -- sounds like a nice sibling project). I see
it as fairly separate question, what the inputs means and how they are
constructed. It's not like supplying a fork but no spoon. So that's
why I didn't quite get why that's somehow a disadvantage. Kind of like
criticizing Tomcat for not including Wordpress or something.
Yeah, I wouldn't worry about that kind of stuff. We get it all the
time in Lucene as people (especially analysts) somehow don't get that
it is just an API built in Java. These kind of technologies always
need several layers. Taste is aimed at being a kernel, while a full
application would need more.
On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 6:15 PM, Otis
Gospodnetic<[email protected]> wrote:
Regarding "only doing CF" - maybe they mean to imply there are no
other inputs other than co-visitation data. For example, no
watching of user behaviour on the page (how long did they stay?
did they scroll? did they page? did they highlight a piece of
text while reading?) or consideration of document similarity.
Of course, Taste is not at all web-specific, so that user behaviour
is something one would/could build on top of Taste. But of course
they didn't email mahout-user to discuss this first -- it's not in
their interest. :)
