Google and Fine-Grained, Point and Click Access
January 9, 2010
Want to know about search without search? This is one of those write ups that make clear how search has morphed in the last five or six years. Why type a query when one can point and click?
Today we had a client call and ask about Google’s faceted navigation. This is a buzzword for providing links to users. The user scans the suggestions and picks the one that appears to be on target. These types of point-and-click interfaces are essential because most folks don’t like Boolean. The thought is that spotting a suspect is easier than formulating a Boolean query. Point-and-click does not ring my chimes, but those who are much younger, enthused by iPhones, and like life simplified are pretty darned excited.
The conversation turned to Google. The caller pointed out that Google did not have a point-and-click or what I call a “training wheels” interface. I tried to be gentle like the average goose. But I am an addled goose so I pointed out that the caller needed to navigate to Google.com and enter the query “cancer receptor”.
There is a plus sign in the left hand column. Click the plus sign and you see some big, chunky categories. Now click the phrase “Related Searches” under the bold faced heading Standard View. Here’s what you should see:
As you can see, there are lots of links to spot and click. No big thinking required. Now if you want to see what’s coming down the trail for this type of query, take a gander (no pun intended by the addled goose) at Search over Structured Data, the 60 page patent application published on July 19, 2007 and filed in October 2005. The number is US2007/0168331. There are a number of inventors who seem to have some affection for Ramanathan Guha’s PSE team.
In that document, Google discloses a system and method to add yet a finder layer of point-and-clickiness; namely, inserting such components as Pubmed, Newsource, Authors, Citations, and the always exciting More. The point is that Google has a fine-grained and a broad stroke point and click capability.
Back to the client who said Google lacked this skill. The point is that making a general statement about Google’s cluelessness is risky. One needs to examine what Google does here and now and then consider what is evident in January 2010 against the context of what is a five year old system and method.
Google is endlessly surprising to some for three reasons:
- Folks don’t look at what Google has available. Man, time is short for some folks today. The idea is that if these folks don’t know about a function, that function must not exist. Too bad this approach does not work reliably for Google functionality.
- Folks don’t read Google’s clear statements of its technical systems and methods. I know that patent applications are not the most exciting things a busy 20 something can do on a January afternoon, but once in a while looking at the real deal documents, not a blog post, can be illuminating.
- Folks don’t know what they are looking for, so even when Google puts the purloined letter on their keyboard, the letter is invisible. I don’t know how to remediate this, but that’s why I am an addled goose and not a sleek, confident master of the universe.
Before making a generalization about Google, I think it is helpful to know exactly what Google offers as well as what its engineers have disclosed in technical documents freely available to anyone who takes the time to look and read.
Stephen E. Arnold, January 9, 2010
I wish to disclose to the USPTO that I was not paid to point out the value of their honorable work, no matter how dull it may be.
Comments
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
