Folksonomies: Why do we need controlled vocabulary?

Noruzi, Alireza Folksonomies: Why do we need controlled vocabulary? Webology, 2007, vol. 4, n. 2. [Journal article (Unpaginated)]

[img]
Preview
 Text
Folksonomies-_Why_do_we_need_controlled_vocabulary.pdf - Published version
Download (50kB) | Preview

English abstract

The Web consists of diverse information collections in terms of the type of content, context, format and quality. However, this diversity, as good as it is, often brings challenges for users in their web information seeking activities. The technologies such as wiki, blog, RSS, and folksonomy that build Web 2.0 present an opportunity to share knowledge and facilitate interactions between users and computers. One of the main challenges of Web 1.0 was that users were not engaged in information organization. Currently folksonomy-based systems (e.g., Del.icio.us) engage users in bookmarking and introducing their favorites.

Item type: Journal article (Unpaginated)
Keywords: Web 2.0, Folksonomy, Knowledge Organization, Classification, Thesaurus
Subjects: I. Information treatment for information services > IC. Index languages, processes and schemes.
I. Information treatment for information services > ID. Knowledge representation.
H. Information sources, supports, channels. > HQ. Web pages.
L. Information technology and library technology > LS. Search engines.
L. Information technology and library technology > LC. Internet, including WWW.
Depositing user: Dr. Alireza Noruzi
Date deposited: 25 Aug 2007
Last modified: 12 Mar 2019 15:14
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10760/10308

References

Buckland, M. (1999). Vocabulary as a central concept in library and information science. In Digital Libraries: Interdisciplinary Concepts, Challenges, and Opportunities. Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Conceptions of Library and Information Science (CoLIS3, Dubrovnik, Croatia, 23-26 May 1999). Ed. By T. Arpanac et al. Zagreb: Lokve, pp. 3-12.

Folksonomy (2007, May 6). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved November 25, 2006, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folksonomy

Guy, M., & Tonkin, E. (2006), Folksonomies: Tidying up tags? D-Lib Magazine, Vol. 12(1). Retrieved November 25, 2006, from http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january06/guy/01guy.html

Lancaster, F.W. (1979). Information retrieval systems: Characteristics, testing and evaluation. 2nd ed., John Wiley and Sons, Chichester.

Macgregor, G., & McCulloch, E. (2006). Collaborative tagging as a knowledge organisation and resource discovery tool. Library Review, 55(5): 291-300.

Mika, P. (2005). Ontologies are us: A unified model of social networks and semantics. In Proceedings of 4th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC2005), 2005, pp. 522-536.

Milstead, J.L. (2000). About thesauri. Retrieved November 25, 2006, from http://www.bayside-indexing.com/Milstead/about.htm

Niwa, S., Doi, T., & Honiden, S. (2006). Web page recommender system based on folksonomy mining. Information Processing Society of Japan (IPSJ) Journal, 47(5): 1382-1392.

Noruzi, A. (2006). Folksonomies: (Un)Controlled Vocabulary? Knowledge Organization, 33(4), 199-203.

Shirky, C. (2005). Ontology is overrated: Categories, links and tags. Retrieved November 25, 2006, from http://www.shirky.com/writings/ontology_overrated.html

Yang, K. (2005). Information Retrieval on the Web. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (ARIST), 39 (1), 33-80.


Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item
Contact us
Send email Sponsors
Sponsor: AIMS Sponsor: D&P Sponsor: UniNa CAB Get connected
Facebook Facebook Twitter Twitter Linkedin LinkedIn RSS RSS