Home | Browse | Search | Credits | About
Register | User Area | DL-Harvest | Help
DLIST

Social Tagging and the Next Steps for Indexing

Tennis, Joseph T. (2006) Social Tagging and the Next Steps for Indexing. In Furner, Jonathan and Tennis, Joseph T, Eds. Proceedings Proceedings 17th Workshop of the American Society for Information Science and Technology Special Interest Group in Classification Research 17, Austin, Texas.

This is the latest version of this eprint.

Full text available as:
PDF - Requires Adobe Acrobat Reader or other PDF viewer.

Abstract

Social tagging, as a particular type of indexing, has thrown into question the nature of indexing. Is it a democratic process? Can we all benefit from user-created tags? What about the value added by professionals? Employing an evolving framework analysis, this paper addresses the question: what is next for indexing? Comparing social tagging and subject cataloguing; this paper identifies the points of similarity and difference that obtain between these two kinds of information organization frameworks. The subsequent comparative analysis of the parts of these frameworks points to the nature of indexing as an authored, personal, situational, and referential act, where differences in discursive placement divide these two species. Furthermore, this act is contingent on implicit and explicit understanding of purpose and tools available. This analysis allows us to outline desiderata for the next steps in indexing.

EPrint Type:Conference Paper
Keywords:Subject Cataloguing, Social Tagging, Post-Fordism, Intertextuality, Framework Analysis
Subjects:Indexing
Knowledge Structures
Knowledge Organization
Information Analysis
ID Code:2091
Deposited On:09 November 2007
Eprint Statistics:View statistics for this eprint
Tell A Colleague:Tell a colleague about it.

Beghtol, C. (2003). Classification for information retrieval and classification for knowledge discovery: relationships between “professional” and “naïve” classifications. Knowledge Organization 30: 64-73.

Beghtol, C. (1986). Bibliographic classification theory and text linguistics: aboutness analysis, intertextuality, and the cognitive act of classifying documents. Journal of Documentation 42: 84-113.

Day, R. (2001). Totality and representation: A history of knowledge management through European documentation, critical modernity, and post-Fordism. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 52: 725-735.

Golder, S. A., and Huberman, B. A. (2006). Usage patterns of collaborative tagging systems. Journal of Information Science 32:198-208.

IFLA. (2006). IFLA Core Activity: IFLA-CDNL Alliance for Bibliographic Standards (ICABS): Background. Retrieved October 30, 2006, from http://www.ifla.org/VI/7/icabs-background.htm.

Jacob, E. K. (2000). Unpublished notes on controlled vocabulary evaluation. Indiana University, Bloomington, IN.

Mai, J.-E. (2005). Analysis in indexing: Document and domain centered approaches. Information Processing & Management 41: 599-611.

Sauperl, A. (2004). Catalogers’ common ground and shared knowledge. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 55: 55-63.

Soergel, D. (1999). The rise of ontologies or the reinvention of classification. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 50: 1119-1120.

Tennis, J. T. (2005). Conceptions of subject analysis: A metatheoretical investigation. Ph.D. dissertation. University of Washington, Seattle, WA.

Vickery, B. C. (1997). Ontologies. Journal of Information Science 23: 277-286.

Available Versions of this Item

EPrints dLIST, an open access archive for the Information Sciences, is supported by the School of Information Resources and Library Science and Learning Technologies Center, University of Arizona. Established in 2002, dLIST has a global Advisory Board and is a part of the Information Technology & Society Research Lab. Open Archives
Contact: Admin | Donate