i-DB's Department Number: 007 Date: 08 01 2002 Author: Intag Source: Intag   What are the I-Website differences   Most Websites are old fashioned, extremely expensive and ageing too fast Most Websites have content with a limited life span. Perhaps when they were initially built in any piece of them were useful for their visitors but as times passes by their content looses applicability, it's like if they shrinks, as it's depicted by the blue arrows in the figure above. To avoid these aging Websites owners need of a very expensive and continuous upgrading process. Unfortunately even with this upgrading the real useful Websites content shrinks fast because they don't have at hands an efficient procedure to cope with the continuous market changes in products and services and in users' preferences. Effectively, in order to attract users and to keep them loyalty, Websites need of "Attractions", under the form of services, facilities, and entertainments but in most cases they don't have established standard and procedures to measure their efficiency, for instance, in terms of traffic, time spent, clicks and at large, businesses opportunities. It means that many Websites, even from the very beginning, are globally inefficient from the matchmaking point of view. Billion of Websites are hosted In the "dark" sky of the Web space. Some of them are important, many trivial,many unimportant, depending of the users' point of view. They are up there to be visited as much as possible like Cyberspace e-lighthouses but only a few of them get that purpose efficiently. Most of them cannot afford the increasing cost of being enlightened and many get older too fast besides. We depict here two sites that initially had the same content, one shrinking its content and aging too much and another one with an intelligent architecture and with an interactive content, continuously trying to adapt by itself to the changes of the market and users' preferences. The first difference: A living Content On the contrary, I-Websites have interactive content, depicted by the central gray body at left, which has an architecture that allows them to be always tuned-up with market trends and at the same time with users preferences!. To accomplish that the units of content, namely documents, articles, catalogues, recordings, objects of information and knowledge at large, are topological and functional described and maintained "alive" through special tags that account for their ageing process, the detailed chronic about how were they used by users. The second difference: A semantic descriptor The yellow crown is the global content descriptor, its i-map where you may find the classical site map, a set of interactive guides and tutorials for the optimized use of the content, the content Thesaurus and all the semantic information needed to make the communications with users fluid and friendly. The third difference: users make use of the full Web space via agents The third difference, depicted above by the green crown on the left is the interface that communicates the I-Website with Web space via I-agents, Intelligent Agents. From here some I-agents go to the We space to look for something that is needed. Some others I-agents do the opposite, bring by themselves or by Website requisition something that is "a priori" considered valuable. In this region all the most recent users' interactions tracking login is hosted. From time to time the I-content is updated, shrinking the green region by compiling statistics onto a historical database. An Expert System in the core of the process All this lively process is continuously performed by an Expert System, named FIRST, which stands for Full Information Retrieval System Thesaurus, not shown here. Is this Expert System which command almost all the evolutionary tasks, leaving only the highest level decisions to the human administrators. Robots and agents command, general upgrading, errors handling, statistics, suggestions to human administrators, general communications with users are tasks performed by FIRST. I-Websites have low costs of upgrade and maintenance We stated in the beginning "some" valuable differences, meaning that there are more. Effectively, i-Website maintenance and upgrading costs are by far lower than conventional Websites of equivalent content, from one fourth to one fifth. Instead of having a staff for each type of section, facility or attraction, the Expert System architecture only demands a centralized staff of content. The human structure of an I-Website resembles a highly centralized editorial business concerning the content, that is, instead of having a Content Manager, a Webmaster and a myriad of specialized departments, the tasks are to be performed by staff of a few General Content Senior Specialists (Journalists profile) lead by the Chief Editor. The economy in Programming and Web developing will be significant because the inherent advantages of the centralized intelligent architecture. Once implemented the system we estimate that even huge I-Website like important Portals could be adequately maintained and upgraded with a permanent staff of two Senior Programmer,