Flag Product

Social Bookmarking Tools (I)

Add to my list

Send to friend

Compare prices

Shop for it: (added from 1 site)

Buy itdlib.org

See more products from this brand »

Added by 3 people

asta_b added to Tags and...

andrehuf added to social software

cbrayton added to Market Machine...

0 Hearts

Description:

Traditional means of organizing information elements have generally relied on well-defined and pre-declared schemas ranging from simple controlled vocabularies to taxonomies to thesauri to full-blown ontologies [20]. This orderly... See more » Traditional means of organizing information elements have generally relied on well-defined and pre-declared schemas ranging from simple controlled vocabularies to taxonomies to thesauri to full-blown ontologies [20]. This orderly approach to cataloguing allows for both the validation and quality control of known terms to be registered within an information system. By contrast, the new link managers tend to use dynamic categorization systems whereby the user annotates links with whatever terms seem most relevant. Links are generally annotated with 'tags', which are free-form labels assigned by the user and not drawn from any controlled vocabulary. This is very much a 'bottom-up' (or personal) approach compared with the traditional 'top-down' (or organizational) structured means of classification. This unstructured (or better, free structured) approach to classification with users assigning their own labels is variously referred to as a 'folksonomy' [n10], 'folk classification', 'ethnoclassification' [n11], 'distributed classification', or 'social classification'. Other terms that arise are 'open tagging', 'free tagging', and 'faceted hierarchy'. Following Adam Mathes in his paper 'Folksonomies – Cooperative Classification and Communication Through Shared Metadata' [21] we would generally incline to the term 'social classification', or even 'distributed classification', as this, to our minds, most closely describes the nature of the activity, although we must concede that the word 'folksonomy' has gained considerable currency and there is little getting away from it. There are various aspects to tagging that can be mentioned here although the reader is referred to some more considered pieces [n12]. Tags generally produce a flat namespace, rather than the hierarchical structures that a taxonomy or other formal classification system usually provides. This, of course, has its upsides and downsides. A formal classification system needs generally to be predictive both of the ordering of terms that are used within it, and of the terms that will be allowed (or tolerated) by it. By contrast, a free tagging approach to classification is a jumbled, hit-and-miss affair, and any system that it may throw up must be discovered, or learned, after the event. In many ways this approach to classification mimics the Web itself in microcosm, compared to earlier, more static, information systems like Gopher, which required some due diligence in arranging the nodes of information. Some proponents of tagging have been dismissive of formal classification systems, although we believe the two approaches to be complementary. As Clay Shirky has remarked [22]: "Ontology is a good way to organize objects, [...], but it is a terrible way to organize ideas, and in the period between the invention of the printing press and the invention of the symlink, we were forced to optimize for the storage and retrieval of objects, not ideas." We note there have been some attempts to introduce structure within tags. Some users have adopted private conventions to indicate hierarchy (or other structural relationships) within an otherwise flat namespace, but these indications are just intended for personal use and cannot as yet be leveraged to any common advantage. Another approach that has been discussed (and, in the case of del.icio.us even implemented as 'tag bundles') is the tagging of tags, which could result in the creation of hierarchical folksonomies. This is an area that is worth tracking – there are no rules as yet. Anecdotal evidence (see Jon Udell's screencast on del.icio.us [23]) supports the view that there is a natural tendency towards the convergence of tags. Strategies to facilitate this development are also possible. In a blog entry entitled 'Folksonomies: How we can improve the tags' [24], Lars Pind has suggested various possibilities including the following: a) 'suggest tags for me', b) 'find synonyms automatically', c) 'help me use the same tags others use', d) 'infer hierarchy from the tags', and e) 'make it easy to adjust tags on old content'. Currently only option e) appears to be in common use, presumably because it is the easiest to implement. See less »

Tags:

aggregation, collaboration, content, folksonomy, social, social bookmarking, social media, social software, software, tagging, value-add

Flag Comments

Comments (1)

From the list : Tags and folksonomies by asta_b

Artikkeli social boolmarking -sovelluksista.

Add a Comment:

Not a Kaboodler? Join Now, It's Free!

Email:

Screen Name:

Password:

Birthday:

Security Check
(Reload)

Enter Both Words

I have read and agree to the Terms of Service

Remember me on this computer.

Kaboodle will send you a newsletter and updates from your friends. You can unsubscribe at any time. Kaboodle does not sell or share your email address or personal information with anyone.

Cancel Already a Kaboodler? Sign in

Social Bookmarking Tools (I)

Comments (1)

Add a Comment:

Thanks for Hearting!

Not a Kaboodler? Join Now, It's Free!

Sign in to Kaboodle