Word from our friends at Answers.com that their technology is now DIRECTLY available from the NY Times. This news release explains it all. Interesting and useful. In a nutshell, simply find any word or phrase in an NY Times story and get Answers.com material back (IF available) in a second window.
Example Article: NYT Times article about Space Shuttle and NASA.
+ Alt-Click the word “Thursday” and get this back of reference info.
+ Alt-Click “Kennedy Space Center” and just get local weather info back. If you notice (and it’s not easy) you’ll also find a link to find Kennedy Space Center on the Answers.com site. This result has much more info including related links and a Wikipedia entry.
+ Alt-Click New York
Material from Answers.com (and it’s sources including Columbia Encyclopedia) and The NY Times Guide to Knowledge. However, it appears that this version of Answers.com does NOT offer material from Wikipedia. A direct search of Answers.com for New York correctly assumes NYC and lists multiple suburbs but unlike Answers.com itself offers no disambiguation (when searching for NYC or NY state). Also missing, related links and the entire Wikipedia entry and the concise Encyclopaedia Britannica entry. The Answers.com/NY Times result only offers the Columbia Encyclopedia entry. To be complete, the entry does mention (at the very bottom and in very very small type) additional sources are available by going directly to Answers.com.
I’m guessing licensing might be playing a role in what is and is not visible. However, Wikipedia data not being visible might have been a decision made by the players.
In some cases, you’ll also find material (hyperlinked, note the underline) from NY Times Topics.This service organizes articles by subject or topic. Very cool and even more useful.
Of course, it doesn’t work for every Alt-Click. For example, we wanted more info from Answers.com about Shuttle Program Director, N. Wayne Hale Jr. But came up with a definition of only the word junior. Nevertheless, an interesting approach and one worth watching.
