3
$\begingroup$

Came across a messy link-only answer today, and had to edit to include the titles for the papers with embedded links.

Web addresses reduce readability, and links can expire, limiting future utility. (Ideally, we would also cite the authors, but my experience is title-only works fine for search.)

  • Should we do a section in the "What can I ask about here?" and/or else where to specify how links to research should be handled?
| |
$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Nah...A person not bothered to title the links sure won't be bothered to read any kind of instruction. $\endgroup$ – DuttaA Mar 18 '19 at 7:36
  • $\begingroup$ @DuttaA Sadly I have to agree. $\endgroup$ – DukeZhou Mar 18 '19 at 18:06
3
$\begingroup$

Even if someone provides a full bibliographic record in the form of “author, title, journal” this is not equal to a full reference to existing knowledge. Identify existing papers is the art of using magic keywords. If someone knows, that he needs information about “OWL-S process model”, he is able to retrieve the relevant literature easily. So the question is, which kind of keywords should be entered into the searchbox?

Unfortunately, I don't know. But it's true, that this is an issue on SE.AI and it make sense to discuss if a URL link is the right answer to the problem. Perhaps some kind of AI-related mindmap which provides semantic information to all the sub disciplines would solve the issue.

| |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ No doubt it was a lazy answer. I reformed it because the links looked decent, so it still might provide some utility, or point people in the right direction. (For instance, I just last week found a paper from 2016 on exactly a topic I've been researching, likely because of the noise from explosion of published research.) $\endgroup$ – DukeZhou Mar 11 '19 at 23:58

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .