AI can't solve search. If you look at how google did it, they bullied and cajoled site owners to add detailed metadata to the top of pages. It's not magic, it's creating incentives for people to create documentation.
'bullied and cajoled' is an interesting set of verbs to use here. Is there a reason not to use metadata? Doesn't it make the web easier to index, and therefore easier for everyone to use?
>Is there a reason not to use metadata? Doesn't it make the web easier to index, and therefore easier for everyone to use?
Yes, there's a very good reason not to use metadata: it's extra work, and it's not very fun, just like writing docs for software. So people don't want to do it because it isn't "sexy" (and there aren't very good incentives to overcome people's reluctance to do that work).
Because of this, just like any job that people don't really want to do, you have to "bully and cajole" them into doing it.
If you don't include the right metadata, google won't rank you highly. If you include the right metadata, your content will get higher rankings and the snazzy preview cards on different social media platforms.
Metadata is good! There are structural incentives to be mediocre though.
First, I’m assuming the documentation is already updated (i.e., 1st part is OK = no staleness)
Second, the whole point of AI NLP search (i.e., 2nd part = loss) is that it does not need metadata (which was the basis of the now mostly abandoned semantic web approach to KM).
