Along those lines... I have always found that filtering the log of a website for "search" transactions is an invaluable and interesting tool for assessing the content the site is delivering. Particularly useful are reasonable searches that returned no results for they are an indicator of content gaps.
I think that folksonomies can be useful to formal classification structures in a similar way. For example, asking the residents of Philadelphia to pitch in on building the set of micro-neighborhoods (The Brickyard, The Valley, etc) within the standard (and beloved!) set (Germantown, Old City, Northern Liberties, ...) might add a vibrant layer to the structure of an oral history site. I think we all agree that we are grateful for the formal structures and the intellectual heavy lifting they represent. I expect we also all agree that they reflect their time and their architects and that they need to evolve. My suggestion - let the Classifiers and the Folksonomers sit down at a Tavern twice a year and work it out. Bob Leming Rock River Star -----Original Message----- From: mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Perian Sully Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 11:28 AM To: Museum Computer Network Listserv Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Fwd: folksonomy article Well said. As Mal Booth replied, folksonomy can "scare some people." I think that kind of gets to the crux of the matter, seeing as the library and archives people (and a lot of museums, too!) have done such a fantastic job of classifying everything, and now here's this upstart way of thinking about naming stuff which threatens to undermine that tidy order! Given the shifting nature of language, it would seem to me that folksonomy would assist classification systems - identifying terminologies which are outmoded and outdated. After all, isn't the whole point to help people find and identify stuff? How can they do that if they don't know the words something is classified under? Thus, getting to that hybrid model Nick was suggesting, folksonomy is certainly an aid and not a hindrance. Perian Sully Collection Database and Records Administrator Judah L. Magnes Museum Berkeley, CA >> "Nick Poole" <nick at mda.org.uk> 20/11/2006 4:39 am >>> >> > Jeanette et al, > > I was really interested in the post around the 'Beneath the Metadata' > article. > > I actually think the article has some pretty deep flaws. First of all, > it is > not entirely clear why you would apply these philosophical constructs > to > Folksonomy in the first place and secondly I don't think it helps to > further > the understanding of what Folksonomy and 'traditional' cataloguing are > and > how they might work together. > > The article essentially says that classification is about absolutes - > this > horse is white, that box is empty - whereas Folksonomy is about > subjectivity > and relativism. It goes on to compare classification with > propositional > logic and states that Folksonomy by its nature gives rise to logical > contradiction. It strikes me that this misses a significant part of the > real > value of the approach. > > In her article, Elaine Peterson says that when we catalogue, we are > asking > the question 'What is it?'. I couldn't disagree more. What we are > really > asking is 'What are we going to call this thing (and things relevantly > similar to it)?'. In this sense, 'traditional' classification is an act > of > collective relativism, and is equally subject to the flaws of > subjectivity > as Folksonomy. > > I have no doubt that the wave around Folksonomy will eventually pass, > and I > very much hope that what will be left is an enriched approach to > professional classification. > > There is considerable strength in a hybrid approach which retains the > intellectual rigour of ontological standardisation but which equally > recognises the additional potential value of large-scale subjective > term-attribution. For example, would it not validate our professional > beliefs if the subjective interpretations of tens of thousands of > people > translated up into patterns of meaning which confirmed them? And > similarly, > if they don't, wouldn't there be considerable value in asking why not? > > > Finally, whatever the linguistic consistency or validity of > folksonomic > thesauri, we must never underestimate the importance of letting people > in. > The act of tagging is only partly to do with classification. It is an > affirmative act which says 'I want to be involved' and for that alone, > it is > of tremendous value. > > Nick Poole > Director > Museum Documentation Association > > > > > > > Nick Poole > Director > MDA > > The Spectrum Building, The Michael Young Centre, > Purbeck Road, Cambridge, CB2 2PD > > Telephone: 01223 415 760 > http://www.mda.org.uk ( http://www.mda.org.uk/ ) > http://www.collectionsforall.org.uk ( > http://www.collectionsforall.org.uk/ ) > > The revised edition of SPECTRUM, the UK museum documentation standard, > is > now available. Download it for free at: > > http://www.mda.org.uk/spectrum.htm > -----Original Message----- > From: mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu [mailto:mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu] On Behalf > Of > amalyah keshet > Sent: 18 November 2006 11:00 > To: Museum Computer Network Listserv > Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Fwd: folksonomy article > > Thanks for forwarding this. Good article. > > Amalyah Keshet > > > At 20:33 17/11/2006, you wrote: > > >>> Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2006 09:41:44 -0800 >>> Sender: Visual Resources Association >>> > <VRA-L at LISTSERV.UARK.EDU> > >>> From: Jeanette Mills <jcmills at U.WASHINGTON.EDU> >>> Subject: folksonomy article >>> To: VRA-L at LISTSERV.UARK.EDU >>> Hello everyone -- Considering the recent discussions of folksonomy, >>> I thought this article in the most recent issue of D-Lib might be >>> > of > >>> interest. I don't think it's been mentioned yet. >>> >>> Beneath the Metadata: Some Philosophical Problems with Folksonomy >>> Elaine Peterson, Montana State University >>> http://www.dlib.org/dlib/november06/peterson/11peterson.html >>> >>> Jeanette >>> >>> ===================================== >>> Jeanette C. Mills, MA + MLIS >>> Director of Visual Services & Newsletter Editor >>> School of Art, University of Washington >>> jcmills at u dot washington dot edu >>> 206-543-0649 >>> ===================================== >>> >> -- >> Diane M. Zorich >> 113 Gallup Road >> Princeton, NJ 08542 USA >> Voice: 609-252-1606 >> Fax: 609-252-1607 >> Email: dzorich at mindspring.com >> _______________________________________________ You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer Network (http://www.mcn.edu) To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l at mcn.edu To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit: http://toronto.mediatrope.com/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.14.10/541 - Release Date: 11/20/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.14.10/541 - Release Date: 11/20/2006
