A Guide to The Contextual Web - Page 2
Widgets
In the meantime, we are seeing a surge in applications that deploy a top-down approach to inferring user context and being helpful. Instead of relying on markup in pages, these applications use heuristics and APIs to recognize the information that the user is interacting with. Based on their recognition, these smart tools then offer contextual shortcuts to the relevant bits of information. Speaking broadly, today there are two primary categories of top-down contextual applications: blog plugins and browser add-ons.
Blog plugins offering a contextual experience have been around for some time, starting with preview technologies. One of the first recent unsuccessful attempts at a preview technology was delivered by Browster. Despite its failure, its successors, CoolPreviews, SnapShots, and Apture, have done much better. While CoolPreviews literally focuses on a preview of the page, SnapShots and Apture deliver a compact summary of the information behind the link. The basic premise behind the previews is sound: if the user is not interested in what is behind the link, the preview can save the user an unnecessary click. Because the user context (in this case, the link) is known, relevant information can be brought to the surface and delivered to the user instantly.
Closely related to previews are widgets that offer contextual shortcuts. Like previews, these widgets work by being anchored to links. Examples of this technology include Yahoo! Shortcuts and SmartLinks from my company AdaptiveBlue. Instead of providing a preview of the underlying content, these technologies offer links to related content around the web. The example below shows a SmartLink on a New York Times movie page, which invites the user, for example, to buy the movie on Amazon or rent it on Netflix.
Our last example of contextual widget technology comes from Colorado-based Lijit. Lijit has developed a search technology that focuses on the individual. You claim your presence around the web, on blogs, Twitter, Flickr, etc., and then others can search your pages on specific topics. Say you are on someone's blog and want to do a search on that person; it makes the most sense to search through this person's pages first; after all, you are in this person's context.
Remarkably, Lijit offers another contextual nugget, called Re-search. It is simple, but a great example of the power of context. If you search for a term on Google and end up on a blog that has a Lijit widget, a header appears with additional results and a prompt to search for more. Lijit automatically infers your context, does a search, and offers additional helpful shortcuts.
Page 3: Browser Add-Ons and Conclusion
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all ReadWriteWeb posts
Hi Alex, too bad Juice (covered on RRW earlier) didn't make the list, as I think it's quite competitive with the other companies listed. Anyway, just chiming in on an otherwise excellent article on the state of the Semantic Web.
We have some new (intelligent discovery) tricks up our sleeve for 2009, that we feel will bring another exciting contextual layer to your browser. The problem we're aiming to tackle is how to make "contextual power" part of your regular browsing experience, without disrupting that same experience.
Problem: These pieces do not add all up to a coherent whole; there are some good add-ons and such, but the hype of semantic has far outpaces the actual delivery of the implied promise. I'm all for being optimistic about cutting edge, but I have yet to see a real, can't do without semantic application or web extension that I just can't do without. They have all been interesting, but not compelling.
Maybe the real breakthrough will be when I'm wowed by a web application, and someone has to tell me that some clever use of RDF and OWL made this all possible. Having read the specs, and also having been monitoring the hypeosphere for going on five years, and having worked for a semantic web tools company, I hope that the big thinkers lay ground work for real stuff we can use.
Wonderful add-on descriptions, thank you. I deduced some time ago that browsing FF extensions is like going down an exceptionally long rabbit hole, so I tend to find them only via recommendation these days.
Pondering: one individual's web experience is so different from another's, and so different across (his own) uses... do you foresee the "contextual web" being sometimes more of a hindrance than a help in the nearer future, before this technology comes to fruition?
And when it does, it will sure be interesting to see how the web world reacts to (truly) uncannily well-targeted advertising.
Great summary of extremely interesting space. Good job Alex!
I think the most important point to note in the whole article is that contextual technologies can remove need for search in certain situations.
You can also look at contextual technologies as search done differently (not through keywords).
I also agree with Alan's comment that most of the solutions are hype and that only a few deliver true value. Test of time will show which ones.
I'd add another one to the list - Aka aki. Quite local to Germany, but definitely showing where the contextual technologies are going in mobile.
I am looking at all this developments as the groundwork for the new paradigm of how computers are going to help in the future.
Andraz Tori, Zemanta
Semantic web and context will replace search, then Google will be facing problems.
Disclosure: Our company is very interested in building smarter, better links, but we tend to think of the space as "Discovery" instead of "Contextual".
A drawback of the many of the existing services is they don't deliver new information to the user, or provide substantially more value than opening new tab.
- "Look up this term on Wikipedia!"
- "Buy on Amazon!"
- "Preview this page in a hover!"
etc.
There's no new information in any of these & it strikes me as a lot of "overhead" for saving an infrequent search on wiki/amazon/netflix etc. AFAIC, the "Preview this site" concept died with "Open in new tab".
On the other hand, those who do offer NEW information and surface data that was otherwise unavailable will enjoy the most success. i.e. "Discover" things you didn't know to search for.
And by the way, that's exactly why I love your posts--thanks to your links I always discover new companies and ideas I didn't know to look for by myself.
So there's no doubt that something like context/discovery/sematic etc. will eventually become a big space. And we can certainly enjoy and try to learn from the many interestesting approaches along the way. Thanks for posting.
Well written article but I am surprised to see the glaring omission of LOCATION - quite possibly the most important context of all. From the post:
The Key Properties of The Contextual Web: Relevancy, Shortcuts, Personalization and Remixing...
OMFG location is not listed? WTF?
Here's hoping everyone at RWW will wake up and shake off this "chain to the desk" view of the world.
I agree about Todd's comment about location being a key element. Already some standards are emerging around providing location from the client to the server which will make location based applications much easier for developers.
I also think that personalization, while mentioned, isn't focused upon enough. I believe we only tap into a small percentage of the information we know about a person (their browsing history, likes, dislikes, etc) while serving them up the web. Different types of AI can be used to make inferences based on data and improve these guesses over time.
Informative, dense & thoughtful piece. Interesting no mention of how/where/whether Chrome or Safari are also driving in this same functional direction. A post-search world --- hard to fathom, but provocative.
Fascinating read
Isn't contextual just another way of saying that the search and the browser integration are the same thing, like a marriage between the two. A lot of the big players like Google and FaceBook are doing this contextual content rendering along with intuitive Browsers that have social integration that are contextual, for instance Delicious and Diigo are basing their browser extensions on users actions thus the contextual element is used again.
It's an ever increasing intelligent or as you say contextual web that is driving the innovation and along with semantic attributes we are in for a richer browsing experience. One thing’s for sure the big players will reap the reward. I also believe that everyday users like bloggers and active social network users can tap into this vast oasis and better serve their visitors.
Thanks' for the read
Alex,
In a nutshell, I assume you are trying to unveil an Web incarnation that uses context to facilitate:
1. Serendipitous discovery of relevant "Things" (moving from SEO to SDQ [1] )
2. Less subjectivity and more objectivity
3. Less obtrusive style of advertising (i.e., we will soon be able to actualy read Web content from traditional media behemoths without those poorly located Ads)
4. Expose pathways to other potentially relevant things (i.e., HTTP based Data Source Names aka. URIs, will not be obscured by opaque Web pages and Web Services)
Links:
1. http://tinyurl.com/9ny5qx -- post about Serendipitous Discovery Quotient (SDQ)
Kingsley
I knew that above comment was K. Idehen before I even read the signature line!!! I knew it!
Agree that contextual is not the right word, we're talking about semantic web still.
Regardless of how effective they are, plugins are fine for early adopters, that's about it.
Ubiquity is going to be great, kind of like moving Spotlight to the web.
Actually web pages are not data, they are human-readable information. Data is the in the more or less inaccessible databases that lie behind the websites.
When web pages stop being static, much of the inherent value of the web as a set of indices vanishes. Search engines lose their relevance when pretty much anything can wind up on a given URL. The HTTP protocol also has well known problems with managing state, and the various standard approaches to dealing with this problem are all inadequate in various ways.
It's certainly the case that providing dynamic web page content, backed by some understanding of what the user is doing, will increase the value of a given user interaction, but doing this pervasively will also diminish the value of the web itself.
So it's a trade-off. Providing "contextual" or "dynamic" or "personalized" or "customized" (whatever your current buzz-phrase is) info is great, but it has its place, and shouldn't be a universal approach to site design and implementation.
Great article. I think content has been dethroned, context is the new king!
Quite surprised to see no mention of APML under markup though, this is game changing in the search for context IMHO.
angus
Miramon makes a very important point, which is how we deal with the bridge between current methods & technologies for discovery (search) and the types of content we find and contextually consume.
This gets at the - so far - enduring & painful tension between SEO friendly web pages and the types of user engagement realized by enriching contextual content, data & experience.
So we either wait for the search bot algos to keep apace or we run out ahead and wait for them on the frontier.
When we turn to the grid humans want discovery, experience and distribution interlaced and seamless. And, perhaps, to the point of the original piece - the browser seems to be the medium for this delivery. But we need to figure this out people...I am NOT getting any younger.
And I want it too.
thanks..
I'm sorry, I don't see how you can speak of discovering relevancy of unknown content from local context when it follows that all that can be possible to "discover" is more of the same (things already in local context)- spread out over the web. That does not lead one to what ought to be relevant. It only leads to what is already been judged only possibly relevant in the past.
Like when you are just exploring, as on a tangent, that turns out to be a dead-end; all that is gathered up in what these programs "infer" from the data -- to use Alex's word. It is also used in the heuristic -- or blind guessing -- at what is relevant. What utility that?
Yet what a parade of products there are. Any of them are apt to gather the notions of what is relevant to you from your own bookmarks, from the messages in your in-box, from all your devices. I have to admit; it is smart. It may surprise some people to find out what all those notions are and how they possibly fit into their personal framework. But all of those notions combined or "inferred" are not the substance of relevance, nor are they the sum total of all that is relevant. They are only some artifacts littering one's environment.
So, imo, people should lower any expectations that these products are going to discover what ought to be relevant. And I would caution anyone to dispel any notion that these products have any sort of power of inference, within their programs. People use their powers of inference to judge when something is relevant *especially when* it does not appear to match any previously gathered facts, matters or artifacts in their existence.
I believe producers have an obligation to consumers to be careful not to confuse machine inference from data, for the human inference and induction of the substance of meaning and relevance.
-Ken Ewell
Very nice overview, Alex. A couple more plugins:
http://headup.com
http://mashlogic.com
Excellent article. One minor suggestion, search can be filtered based on context...so sort of limiting to say context can bypass search.
@Alan - Contextual relevance can be achieved when we can infer intent of the user. And we all know how notoriously difficult it is to infer intent of humans. This is not a trivial problem, hence the lack of full-blown applications and experiences. However the pieces are falling in place and like any complex technology it is by many false starts we truly make progress.
@Leadsexplorer - Google wont be replaced. In fact they can provide more targetted results by using context.
@Todd - Location is indeed a key contextual factor
@Ken - You bring up a valid point. People determine relevance not machines. However there are limited use cases where machines can simplify determining contextual relevance.
One factor that needs to be emphasized is this. Once contextual relevance is established the sum of actions that can be layered on them is where effort needs to be spent.
I think this is a nice collection of widgets and applications that add information to web pages based on their content, but I don't see any algorithms here that are about to make the 'contextual' or even the 'semantic' web relevant.
Surely 'context' needs to span more than just additional information and extra links to similar articles? (I can get that all from Google as it is...) Surely true 'context' would require a history, stored and made available to all applications? Even then, when engaging with the web and trying to find something outside of what all these widgets and apps think is your 'context' is going to be really annoying. I see no need for the web to second guess my intentions.
"this [web] understands what we are doing and helps us"
This is nonsense. Other than meta information, this article is still about search. There is no way the collection of widgets and apps mentioned here are going to 'understand' what we are doing. Search, whether you call it that or not is here to stay and my guess is Google is going to lead it for some time to come.
I see the value of defining data for users and browsers but without a universal markup definition will it ever build up momentum?
Derek,
Here are Aldo's points in a nutshell:
1. XBRL is an XML based notation for expressing Financial Reporting Data
2. XBRL is a representation of Data
3. RDF is a framework in which all Data items are Resources (i.e. useful things that have Identity) or Data Objects (or Entities) and these Items/Objects/Entities create a "Mesh" (a Graph) based on their Attribute values and/or Relationships with other Items/Objects/Entities.
XBRL instance data can be presented in RDF Linked Data form such that each item in the XBRL report becomes an Entity endowed with an Identifier.
In the case of Linked Data, the Identifiers incorporate the HTTP protocol such that each Object/Item/Entity is de-referencable over an HTTP network ( which does not always mean the public World Wide Web).
Linked Data is simply about a continuation of the long desired pursuit of platform independent distributed data objects.
Back to XBRL, we already convert XBRL instance docs (XML) into RDF by the use of RDFizer or RDFization middleware. What this means is that right now we can already build Entity/Object graphs from any XBRL document "on the fly" so that you can explore XBRL data object in granular form.
Some live examples:
1. http://demo.openlinksw.com/about/html/http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/40545/000004054508000065/ge-20080930.xml%23GE_CONS_3Q08 - Part of GE's XBRL Instance Data in RDF Linked Data form
2. http://dbpedia.org/resource/Linked_Data - About Linked Data from DBpedia (which is an RDFization of Wikipedia)
I hope this clear up matters. Yes, as you say, you can "Mash" when dealing with XML and the rest of the Web 2.0 stack. Just bear in mind that Linked Data is simply about adding the ability to "Mesh" to the mix since the data is structured at a more granular level.
Kingsley
ı have followed your writing for a long time.really you have given very successful information.
Excellent. Good reading. Great explanation of a complex, and often vague, subject.
.What a post!! Very informative and easy to understand.looking for more such posts..Lets share some information regarding the technology.
Please enter on http://VideoclipManele.blogspot.com
Thank you very much from Romania [Europe]!
Nice Post. Very informative. Thanks a bunch!
I hope this clear up matters. Yes, as you say, you can "Mash" when dealing with XML and the rest of the Web 2.0 stack. Just bear in mind that
I hope this clear up matters. Yes, as you say, you can "Mash" when dealing
I hope this clear up matters. Yes, as you say, you can
One of these evolutions started quietly in 2008. We are witnessing the rise of a new kind of web: contextual. You might not have heard or thought about it much yet, but you are already using it today. Search remains the killer app on the web, but context is quickly become a viable contender. Why? Because context is what happens instead of search.
One of these evolutions started quietly in 2008. We are witnessing the rise of a new kind of web: contextual. You mi
thanksssssssss
thank you
:)
sssssssss
teşekkürler...
thank you very muchh
thank you admin