#108: Citation Search Sorting - Rewrite search on citation search
------------------------+---------------------------------------------------
  Reporter:  tbrooks    |       Owner:  simko         
      Type:  defect     |      Status:  closed        
  Priority:  major      |   Milestone:  v1.0          
 Component:  WebSearch  |     Version:                
Resolution:  fixed      |    Keywords:  inspire UI Oct
------------------------+---------------------------------------------------

Comment (by tbrooks):

 Replying to [comment:6 simko]:
 >
 > One thing we may want to touch base upon is what the default ranking
 proposed to the users for these `Cited by 123 records' links should be.

 I think the default should not be different for citation searches than for
 other searches.   To me the primary use cases for citation searches are
 "following a research trail" and "Who cited my paper"  In both of these
 cases you aren't any _more_ likely to want to see highly cited results
 than if you search for, say "ellis -muon" So whatever the default is for
 regular searches, citation searches should get the same.

 I think we agreed in chat that the logical way to proceed  is "keep
 whatever ranking the user had selected"  and this agrees exactly with my
 idea, that citation searching is not in anyway fundamentally different
 than other types of searches, and changes in sorting would appear
 unexpected.   If the user doesn't specify a ranking (i.e. coming in from
 an external link with no rm coded), then I propose we stick with the
 default for all searches.

 If a day comes when we think that citation count or cites+relevance can
 give a better ranking that is more useful to users than "recent first"
 then we can switch the default for all searches.  But for now, I think
 "recent first" is the most useful ranking we have. (Google Scholar
 disagrees here...)

 >
 >   I think we can kill the two box dichotomy and offer a single box only
 one, with options like "Most cited", "Most recent", "Sort by title A-Z",
 "Most downloaded" (on sites that would want that) and so on, as we mused
 about elsewhere.  Here, if we want, we could offer some pre-defined
 secondary sub-sort order for the citation count, such as by year, if we
 consider it useful.

 Agreed.  100%

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://invenio-software.org/ticket/108#comment:7>
Invenio <http://invenio-software.org>

Reply via email to