- Who created the content
- What else that person has created in the past
- The content creator’s social media connections
- The content creator’s online activity with further content
- The content creator’s interaction with other people
- How the content this person created was received in a social media setting
- The content’s quality, authority, and originality.
- The content’s stylistics (language level, reading difficulty, paragraph length, use of headings and subheadings, overall length, embedded links, supportive links in footnotes, citations, images, and any multimedia embedded in it.
I am not willing to completely read between the lines on this, but I sense that there could be a hint of not only knowing what content was created in the past by the person, but actually what content has the person created on the same subject in the past. If I do or do not read between the lines, I am thinking that authority can be taken to an extra layer of granularity within the enterprise. What I mean is, authority can actually be assigned to employees for a specific subject area.
Even in the enterprise, a page rank on a subject can still be applied using the bullets above with a couple of small adjustments. Page rank would be influenced based on the person's previous content created on the subject, including both writing and social interactions on the subject.
So, by building on the original thoughts in David's book, the ideas on determining the rank of a piece of content depends on not just the general authority of the person that created the content, but can be strengthened based on the authority the employee has on the subject the content is about. (btw, I could have completely gone down the path that page rank should be based on the subject of the page, so it becomes more granular and is a subject page rank - this concept is much more difficult to do).
This comment was inspired by +David Amerland 's book, Google Semantic Search - Amazon Location 1351