Hey Seb. We are among the proud victims of Google's search-within-site. We don't know yet how it affects us, but we may first try to see how many extra referrals we get from Google that contain "GNS=Search+metmuseum.org" (or whatever the best identifier turns out to be). Just to see if people are using it.
The most likely impact for us is in upcoming modifications to our own search. We currently present search results in categorized groupings in order to prevent results in one category (eg Works of Art) from overwhelming another category (eg Calendar). We're doubtful that the way we do it is as useful as it can be to most visitors, but going to a straight Google-like ranked results display doesn't really work for us, either. At least, when we try to use Google to search our own site, the results also leave something to be desired. And not in the comprehensiveness of the results, but in the ranking. The other thing is, I'm pretty sure (although I have no data on this) that most web visitors are comfortable with differences between a site search and a web search. That is, I think their expectations are different when they search our site for "picasso" vs. searching google for "picasso." But the number of visitors for whom this is true may be diminishing, as we, more and more, equate "Google" with "Search." So: if search-within-site turns out to be popular, then I think the goals of our own search change. But I'm not sure how. Do we give up, and acknowledge that doing search in any way different from Google is a) now competing more directly with them, and b) probably just getting more confusing for most visitors; or do we focus on these (probably fewer and fewer) visitors who come to our search expecting it to work just the way it should, not the way that's easiest? Thanks, Matt On 3/27/08 6:36 AM, "Chan, Sebastian" <SebC at PHM.GOV.AU> wrote: > Folks > > I'm curious to hear if anyone else has been affected by Google's > 'search-within-site' feature they have recently rolled out . . . . > > I've blogged in detail about what it is over at Fresh & New . . . . > > http://www.powerhousemuseum.com/dmsblog/index.php/2008/03/27/google-teleportat > ion-googles-search-within-search/ > > If you are affected, what, if anything are you doing about it? > > if you are not (yet), what might you do. > > Curious. > > Seb > > Sebastian Chan > Manager, Web Services > Powerhouse Museum > street - 500 Harris St Ultimo, NSW Australia > postal - PO Box K346, Haymarket, NSW 1238 > tel - 61 2 9217 0109 > fax - 61 2 9217 0689 > e - sebc at phm.gov.au > w - www.powerhousemuseum.com > b - www.powerhousemuseum.com/dmsblog > > > > =========================Important Notice===================================== > This email and attachments are for the use of the intended recipient(s) only > and may contain confidential or legally privileged information or material > that is copyright of Powerhouse Museum or a third party. If you have received > this email in error, please notify the sender immediately and then delete it. > If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or > distribute this e-mail without the author's prior permission. Any views > expressed in this message and attachments are those of the individual sender > and the Powerhouse Museum accepts no liability for the content of this > message. Whilst every care has been taken, the Powerhouse Museum cannot > guarantee that the integrity of this email has been maintained nor that the > email is free of errors or viruses. The Powerhouse Museum advises all > organisations and individuals to undertake their own virus scanning and > security measures. > ============================================================================== > > _______________________________________________ > You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer > Network (http://www.mcn.edu) > > To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l at mcn.edu > > To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit: > http://toronto.mediatrope.com/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l
