Mark Kimpel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Sat, Dec 01, 2007 at 05:28:28PM CET]:
> What I would find useful would be some sort of tagging system for messages.
Hrm. I find tags immensely useful for entities which do not contain primarily
text, such as photos. I am at doubt how keywords are important when they are
not found in the text. There are situations where the first keyword that comes
to mind is tiptoed around in the message, but I don't know if this is often
the case.
> I can't count the times I've remembered seeing a message that addresses a
> question I have down the road but, when Googled, I can't find it.
Is it a problem of way too many false positives or a problem of false negatives?
Tags may help out in the second case, but in my experiencd it is rare.
[...]
>
> Of course, this would be work to set up, but how many of our "experts" who
> so kindly give of their time, get exasperated when similar questions keep
> popping up on the list?
Do you think that people who keep asking similar questions do so because they
didn't do their homework first, or that they Googled and failed?
--
Johannes H�sing There is something fascinating about science.
One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] from such a trifling investment of fact.
http://derwisch.wikidot.com (Mark Twain, "Life on the Mississippi")
______________________________________________
R-help@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
