社交媒体上的分享鼓励HTML元数据的增长

Shawn M. Jones, Valentina Neblitt-Jones, Michele C. Weiglet, Martin Klein, Michael L. Nelson
{"title":"社交媒体上的分享鼓励HTML元数据的增长","authors":"Shawn M. Jones, Valentina Neblitt-Jones, Michele C. Weiglet, Martin Klein, Michael L. Nelson","doi":"10.1109/JCDL52503.2021.00023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In a perfect world, all articles consistently contain sufficient metadata to describe the resource. We know this is not the reality, so we are motivated to investigate the evolution of the metadata that is present when authors and publishers supply their own. Because applying metadata takes time, we recognize that each news article author has a limited metadata budget with which to spend their time and effort. How are they spending this budget? What are the top metadata categories in use? How did they grow over time? What purpose do they serve? We also recognize that not all metadata fields are used equally. What is the growth of individual fields over time? Which fields experienced the fastest adoption? In this paper, we review 227,724 archived HTML news articles from 29 outlets captured by the Internet Archive between 1998 and 2016. Upon reviewing the metadata fields in each article, we discovered that 2010 began a metadata renaissance as publishers embraced metadata for improved search engine ranking, search engine tracking, social media tracking, and social media sharing. When analyzing individual fields, we find that one application of metadata stands out above all others: social cards - the cards generated by platforms like Twitter when one shares a URL. Once a metadata standard was established for cards in 2010, its fields were adopted by 20% of articles in the first year and reached more than 95% adoption by 2016. This rate of adoption surpasses efforts like Schema.org and Dublin Core by a fair margin. When confronted with these results on how news publishers spend their metadata budget, we must conclude that it is all about the cards.","PeriodicalId":112400,"journal":{"name":"2021 ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (JCDL)","volume":"37 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"It's All About The Cards: Sharing on Social Media Encouraged HTML Metadata Growth\",\"authors\":\"Shawn M. Jones, Valentina Neblitt-Jones, Michele C. Weiglet, Martin Klein, Michael L. Nelson\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/JCDL52503.2021.00023\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In a perfect world, all articles consistently contain sufficient metadata to describe the resource. We know this is not the reality, so we are motivated to investigate the evolution of the metadata that is present when authors and publishers supply their own. Because applying metadata takes time, we recognize that each news article author has a limited metadata budget with which to spend their time and effort. How are they spending this budget? What are the top metadata categories in use? How did they grow over time? What purpose do they serve? We also recognize that not all metadata fields are used equally. What is the growth of individual fields over time? Which fields experienced the fastest adoption? In this paper, we review 227,724 archived HTML news articles from 29 outlets captured by the Internet Archive between 1998 and 2016. Upon reviewing the metadata fields in each article, we discovered that 2010 began a metadata renaissance as publishers embraced metadata for improved search engine ranking, search engine tracking, social media tracking, and social media sharing. When analyzing individual fields, we find that one application of metadata stands out above all others: social cards - the cards generated by platforms like Twitter when one shares a URL. Once a metadata standard was established for cards in 2010, its fields were adopted by 20% of articles in the first year and reached more than 95% adoption by 2016. This rate of adoption surpasses efforts like Schema.org and Dublin Core by a fair margin. When confronted with these results on how news publishers spend their metadata budget, we must conclude that it is all about the cards.\",\"PeriodicalId\":112400,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2021 ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (JCDL)\",\"volume\":\"37 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-04-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2021 ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (JCDL)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/JCDL52503.2021.00023\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2021 ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (JCDL)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/JCDL52503.2021.00023","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在理想情况下,所有文章都一致地包含足够的元数据来描述资源。我们知道这不是现实,所以我们有动机去调查作者和出版商提供自己的元数据时所呈现的元数据的演变。由于应用元数据需要时间,我们认识到每个新闻文章的作者都有有限的元数据预算来花费他们的时间和精力。他们是如何使用这笔预算的?最常用的元数据类别是什么?它们是如何随着时间的推移而成长的?它们的作用是什么?我们还认识到,并非所有元数据字段都是平等使用的。随着时间的推移,各个领域的增长是什么?哪些领域的采用速度最快?在本文中,我们回顾了互联网档案馆在1998年至2016年期间从29家媒体捕获的227,724篇存档的HTML新闻文章。回顾每篇文章中的元数据字段,我们发现2010年开始了元数据复兴,因为发布者采用元数据来改进搜索引擎排名、搜索引擎跟踪、社交媒体跟踪和社交媒体共享。在分析单个字段时,我们发现元数据的一个应用比所有其他应用都突出:社交卡——当用户共享URL时,Twitter等平台生成的卡片。2010年为卡片建立元数据标准后,第一年就有20%的文章采用了该标准,到2016年,采用率达到95%以上。这个采用率远远超过了Schema.org和Dublin Core。当面对这些关于新闻出版商如何使用他们的元数据预算的结果时,我们必须得出结论,这都是关于卡片的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
It's All About The Cards: Sharing on Social Media Encouraged HTML Metadata Growth
In a perfect world, all articles consistently contain sufficient metadata to describe the resource. We know this is not the reality, so we are motivated to investigate the evolution of the metadata that is present when authors and publishers supply their own. Because applying metadata takes time, we recognize that each news article author has a limited metadata budget with which to spend their time and effort. How are they spending this budget? What are the top metadata categories in use? How did they grow over time? What purpose do they serve? We also recognize that not all metadata fields are used equally. What is the growth of individual fields over time? Which fields experienced the fastest adoption? In this paper, we review 227,724 archived HTML news articles from 29 outlets captured by the Internet Archive between 1998 and 2016. Upon reviewing the metadata fields in each article, we discovered that 2010 began a metadata renaissance as publishers embraced metadata for improved search engine ranking, search engine tracking, social media tracking, and social media sharing. When analyzing individual fields, we find that one application of metadata stands out above all others: social cards - the cards generated by platforms like Twitter when one shares a URL. Once a metadata standard was established for cards in 2010, its fields were adopted by 20% of articles in the first year and reached more than 95% adoption by 2016. This rate of adoption surpasses efforts like Schema.org and Dublin Core by a fair margin. When confronted with these results on how news publishers spend their metadata budget, we must conclude that it is all about the cards.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信