sharepoint taxonomy and metadata 11-19-09

SharePoint 2007 Information Architecture

Integrating taxonomy & metadata

Jeff Carr, Stephanie Lemieux Earley & Associates

Taxonomy Bootcamp November, 2009

2

SharePoint is very easy to implement badly

Typical SharePoint Projects 3

Biz Reqs Implementtttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt

Implement Business Req’s Implement

Business Req’s Implement

Examples courtesy of Lulu Pachuau: http://www.slideshare.net/LuluP/information‐architecture‐and‐sharepoint

Where is the information architecture?!

Requirements Research

Use Cases & Personas

Site Map & Navigation

Wireframes

Taxonomy

Content Modeling/Metadata

Prototyping/Testing

The IA Process

© Earley & Associates 2009

For SharePoint

Good IA needs a system that:

  Supports control & standards   Has user friendly interfaces (esp. tagging)   Understands relationships

 Hierarchy  Synonyms  Associations

  Manages metadata & taxonomy values

5


Before we start… some basics

Site Collections Collection of sites Primary source of main navigation

Sites Container for lists/libraries Primary source of “quick launch” navigation

Lists Libraries

List: Basic unit of storage, collection of items Library: advanced list

6

Columns & content types

Lists

Content Types

Collection of columns Associated policies, workflow, templates

Columns Individual metadata item Can reference lists or other data sources

7

8

Boundaries & Inheritance

Content types inherit from parents

Content types are specific to a site collection

More about columns

  Different kinds…  Date  Number  Free text  Controlled list (a.k.a Lookup)

 Etc.

9

You can also create custom column types


Content display 10


Advanced search (OOTB) 11

Full text keywords

Extended metadata properties


Navigation 12

All navigation approaches are configurable (largely) Quick launch shows “current site”

elements

Top‐level navigation shows sub sites and peers


Strengths

  Easy to create new structures   Navigation is largely automatic   Easy to create metadata and connect to LOB systems

  Many ways to consume content   Office integration

 Document information panel  Property propagation

13


Weaknesses

  Very physical architecture   Content types and columns scoped to site collections

  No metadata/taxonomy management  No referential integrity

  No hierarchical metadata …or any kind of relationships!

  OOTB search reflects all limitations

14

Topics Architecture Accounting Construction Engineering Civil Mechanical Environment Finance


No hierarchy

  Metadata can only be tagged and stored as flat controlled vocabulary – no hierarchy possible

Regions

•  Asia Pacific •  EMEA •  Latin America •  North America

Countries

•  Cambodia •  Canada •  Chad •  China •  Columbia •  Croatia

Geographic regions

•  Asia Pacific •  China •  Japan

•  Europe •  France •  Switzerland

Possible Possible Not Possible

15


Native thesaurus

  Expansions (a.k.a synonyms)  E.g. HR = Human Resources = Employee Relations

  Replacements (a.k.a. use)  E.g. for NTK or W2K use Windows 2000

16

<XML ID="Microsoft Search Thesaurus"> <thesaurus xmlns="x-schema:tsSchema.xml"> <expansion> human resources

hr employee relations

</expansion> </thesaurus> </XML>

<XML ID="Microsoft Search Thesaurus"> <thesaurus xmlns="x-schema:tsSchema.xml">

<replacement> <pat>NT5</pat> <pat>W2K</pat> Windows 2000 </replacement>

</thesaurus> </XML> No ability to store any other types of relationships (e.g. Associative)

17

Q: I have SharePoint, but I still want good findability. What are my options?

a) Pray b) Ace OOTB IA features c) Customize d) Buy 3rd party add‐ons

Improving navigation

  List views   RSS feeds   Pre‐constructed searches that look like navigation  E.g. Content query web part with XSLT

  Faceted navigation

18


Improving tagging

  Automate some tagging (workflow or event handler)  Location  User profile

  Custom tagging interface   Cascading list add‐on   Taxonomy management tool connector   Auto‐tagging tools

19

Here’s the thing about tools…!

What’s the difference between an add‐on, a connector and a full 3rd party tool?

Connectors

  Taxonomy management tool (or other) as source for metadata and search UI  Smartlogic (www.smartlogic.com)  Synaptica (www.synapticacentral.com/)  Wordmap (www.wordmap.com)  SchemaLogic (www.schemalogic.com)  MetaVis (www.metavistech.com)

21


The underlying issue

You can’t change the basic data structure in SharePoint (i.e. no relationships)

$ Add‐on – mimic hierarchy, enhance UI $$ Connector – outsource structure

Or

$$$ 3rd party tool

22


Cascading list add‐on 23

http://sharepointsnippets.com/post/2009/01/Cascading-Dropdown---Configuration.aspx © Earley & Associates 2009

Tagging add‐on/tool

Add‐on Taxo. Mgt. Tool

24

E.g. from Wordmap www.kwizcom.com

Improving search

  Managed properties/metadata mapping   Relevant content near the “top”   Authoritative pages/URL removal   Canned (“saved”) searches   Best bets   Faceted search add‐on or connector

26


Add‐on: Codeplex faceted search

  Free, but leverages SharePoint structure, so limited to flat lists

27

Connector: SmartLogic e.g. 28

Refine / Suggest with preferred terms and relationships


Connector: SchemaLogic e.g. 29

Model content types & metadata outside SharePoint

How much do you need? 30

MOSS OOTB

Advanced search, limited configuration Navigation based on site architecture

Basic add‐on Better UI for search or tagging Basic faceted search (no/limited hierarchy)

Connector Taxonomy‐driven faceted search BT/NT thesaurus Auto‐tagging

External search tool Fully flexible UX Deep indexing Configurable search


What to expect in 2010

  Auto tagging   Hierarchical metadata   Centralized metadata store   Metadata‐based navigation   Social tagging standard for all content and sites   Search faceting and ranking manipulation

(blog post on 2010 metadata management:

http://www.earley.com/blog/metadata‐and‐taxonomy‐management‐sharepoint‐2010)

31

Conclusions

  Don’t skip IA process just because it’s SharePoint   Master OOTB features first   Keep your eye on consistency across sites, site collections through governance

  Select tools based on high‐value requirements

32


Resources

  Free four part series on improving search and IA  www.earley.com/webinars/jumpstarts/sharepoint‐search‐and‐information‐architecture

  Codeplex: www.codeplex.com   WSS Demo (Metadata and Content Types)

www.wssdemo.com/Pages/metadata.aspx   Shawn Shell: CMS Watch SharePoint Analyst &

Consultant (also co‐author of this session)   www.consejoinc.com (blog: http://blog.consejoinc.com/)   www.cmswatch.com/SharePoint/Report/


Tool list

 Smartlogic (www.smartlogic.com) ‐ taxo  Synaptica (www.synapticacentral.com/) ‐ taxo  Wordmap (www.wordmap.com) ‐ taxo  SchemaLogic (www.schemalogic.com) ‐ taxo  MetaVis (www.metavistech.com)  Ontolica (www.ontolica.com) ‐ search  Concept Searching (www.conceptsearching.com)  Cogniva (www.cogniva.ca) ‐ tagging  SharePart XXL (www.sharepartxxl.com) ‐ tagging  Kwizcom (www.kwizcom.com) ‐ tagging

34


SHAREPOINT INFORMATION ARCHITECTURE

Taxonomy Bootcamp 2009

Stephanie Lemieux ([email protected]) Jeff Carr ([email protected]) Earley & Associates www.earley.com

Photo credits: http://www.flickr.com/photos/urbancityarch/3921454758/

© 2009

sharepoint taxonomy and metadata 11-19-09

Technology

earley amp

earley

smartlogic

kwizcom

schemalogic

http

wordmap

www