Subject: Re: [xsl] OT - Learning From: António Mota <amsmota@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 16:19:26 +0100 |
Are those strategies somewhat "formalized"? Have they a name? I need this not just for my own use but also to include in a "how-to" or "lessons learned" presentation, so i want something with some "pomp", as those kind of things tend to be better memorized. For example, to explain some photo-related operations i've did in a project, i said i used a low-pass filter *due to the Nyquist theorem*, so i'm preety sure people will remember that... On 10/21/05, JBryant@xxxxxxxxx <JBryant@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I have indexed quite a pile of books, so I can tell you some tricks that > indexers use to make information visible and how to exploit them to find > what you want. > > The problem is that a reader wants to find something but doesn't know the > words used by the subject matter experts in that field (this happens when > readers approach a new field). So indexers often place synonyms with See > references in the index. The other thing that indexers often do is > scramble the word order of each important multi-word term. Thus, "Tuning > the Deteronic Frombotzer" becomes "Tuning, Deteronic Frombotzer", > "Deteronic Frombotzer, Tuning", and "Frombotzer, Deteronic, Tuning". > > All of that means that two search strategies can reward someone > researching a new (to that person) field: First, search for a broad range > of synonyms. Second, keep your search strings short, so as to maximize the > number of matches. Once you've gotten a few successes and have discovered > some of the terms in use in the new field, you can narrow your searches > and have greater success at finding the bits you want. > > That assumes that the information you seek has been indexed somewhere > visible to Google or some other search engine. Given that you are looking > for education-related terms, that's pretty likely, as educators (I used to > be one) are generally more mindful of such things than most folks. > > Jay Bryant > Bryant Communication Services > (presently consulting at Synergistic Solution Technologies) > > > > > Antsnio Mota <amsmota@xxxxxxxxx> > 10/21/2005 09:35 AM > Please respond to > xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > To > xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > cc > > Subject > Re: [xsl] OT - Learning > > > > > > > Thanks for that, i had searched the wikipedia but didn't find that! > > But let me try to put my question in another way, less related to > learning and more to information searching. > > When i don't find information the way i asked for it, what should i > do? How do i refraze the question? Where and how to look if i have no > clue to start with? > > Are there some heuristcs that apply here? > > Thanks again. > > On 10/21/05, James Fuller <jim.fuller@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Antsnio Mota wrote: > > > > >I'm sorry for the OT, but i've spend two days searching the list > > >archives and my personal mail archive and couldn't find what i'm > > >looking for. > > > > > > > > oddly enough I was looking for some formalisms related to learning a few > > days ago... > > > > >So can someone knows what is that theory, what's is name and author, > > >or something related to? > > > > > > > > dont know what specifically u were looking for... > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learning_theory_%28education%29 > > > > found it to be a useful starting point. > > > > gl, JF
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] OT - Learning, JBryant | Thread | Re: [xsl] OT - Learning, JBryant |
Re: [xsl] OT - Learning, JBryant | Date | Re: [xsl] OT - Learning, JBryant |
Month |