I believe the biggest factor on how we judge a system for future usability
is how many results we get if we are looking for "something" like
"something".
Imagine a shoe shop, with only two pair of shoes in it. And one with a few
hundreds.
The result in the end might be the same you leave both shop's not finding
what you want, but most people will consider
the shop with a hundred pairs more promising and worth spending time next
time they try to find some shoes.
So making sure people are getting results in their searches is probably one
of the more important issues, after
my doubts about how the routing is handled.
Even though it might mean some significant overhead, i would consider doing
something like normalizing keywords.
If it must be, per language but in the beginning English should be enough.
So if i wanted to share the following file, and i would like it public, so
people can find it, why not store it such:
"Woh_the.fuck_is ALICe(2008).divx.avi.WMV" => { HW , HT , CFK , S , CL ,
2008 , DVX , V , MVW }
Put the file under the hash's of those nine "key words".
When i seach now for "fuck alice" => { CFK , CL }
search h(CFK) AND h(CL) will return a lot of wrong similar results but
them one can filter locally in a more elaborate way.
It might even be more selective than search h(video/x-msvideo)
At least it returns results, whereas "Woh_the.fuck_is
ALICe(2008).divx.avi.WMV" as a key word is very unlikely that any one
would think to search for and therefore never be found, never be spread
....., except by chance of course.
regards leo
_______________________________________________
GNUnet-developers mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnunet-developers
