Challenges of the Implementation of Folksonomy in Library Software of Iran

Lotfi Bakhshayesh, Zahra and Noruzi, Alireza and Bani Eghbal, Nahid Challenges of the Implementation of Folksonomy in Library Software of Iran. International Journal of Current Life Sciences, 2014, vol. 4, n. 10, pp. 8388-8396. [Journal article (Paginated)]

[img]
Preview
 Text
folksonomy.pdf
Download (218kB) | Preview

English abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study is the feasibility of applying tagging and categorizing people (Folksonomy) in library software of Iran. By using folksonomy services, libraries can take an important step in accelerating the process of provision and disseminating information and by using user-oriented participatory methods they can convert libraries and informational centers to dynamic and user-oriented organizations. Therefore this study deals with the feasibility of applying tagging and categorizing people (folksonomy) in existing library software of Iranian universities and reviews the fields of design and creation of user and folksonomy oriented libraries. Methodology: Research methodology is survey, descriptive and comparative. And the statistical population of this study consists of common library software in Iranian universities including three comprehensive software of Simorgh (product of Nosa Company), DJ LIB Pars Azarakhsh (product of Pars Azarakhsh Company), and Sana (product of Payam Mashregh Company). In descriptive section, data and preliminary data collection tools have investigated 41 items of the feasibility capabilities of implementation of folksonomy in the library software by using a checklist that includes 5 indicators (including the need for creation and implementation, application and development, support and librarian functions) and 25 checklist were distributed between managers and staff of information centers and university libraries, library software engineers and programmers and the results were reviewed. And for this purpose the survey, analysis and comparative research methods were used and after the data collection, the data analysis was conducted in accordance with the research questions. Findings: Study findings determined that Sana Library Software has got the highest score at index of: 1. measures required for folksonomy; 2. strategies and implementation of Folksonomy; 3. ability to run and develop folksonomy in the library software; 4. the tasks of librarians in providing services by utilizing folksonomy capabilities and Pars Azarakhsh Digital Library Software has acquired the highest rating at index; and 5. updated supports of Folksonomy in library software. Conclusion: On the basis of these findings, it is concluded that Sana (product of Payam Mashregh Company) has achieved significant progress in creating appropriate infrastructure for implementation of folksonomy and Pars Azarakhsh software progress is not considerable and the comprehensive software of Simorgh, at the last ranking, has not created an appropriate infrastructure for implementation and it is far from reaching such facilities and the goal. Finally, guidelines and recommendations derived from the study for infrastructure of software has been provided.

Item type: Journal article (Paginated)
Keywords: Social tagging; Library classifications; information sources, Folksonomies; Library software; OPAC
Subjects: I. Information treatment for information services > ID. Knowledge representation.
L. Information technology and library technology > LR. OPAC systems.
L. Information technology and library technology > LS. Search engines.
Depositing user: Dr. Alireza Noruzi
Date deposited: 14 Aug 2019 14:01
Last modified: 14 Aug 2019 14:03
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10760/38916

References

Al-Khalifa, Hend S., & Davis, Hugh C. (2007). Exploring the value of folksonomies for creating semantic metadata. International Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems (IJSWIS), 3(1), 12-38.

Bates, M.J. (1998). The design of browsing and berry – picking techniques for the online search interface. Online Review. 13 (5), 407-474.

Beikin, Nicholas J. (1980). Anomalous states of knowledge as a basic for information retrieval. Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science, 5, 133-143.

Birdsall, William F. (2007). Web 2.0 as a Social Movement. Webology, 4(2). Retrieved October 5, 2014, from http://www.webology.org/2007/v4n2/a40.html

Constantia, Kakalia (2010). Exploitation of folksonomies in subject analysis. Library & Information Science Research, 32(3), 192–202.

Farrelly, Glen. (2009). On Tags and Signs: A Semiotic Analysis of Folksonomies. Faculty of Information Quaterly, 1(1), 1-8.

Governor, James, Hinchcliffe, Dion, & Nickull, Duane (2009) Web 2.0 Architectures. USA: O’Reilly Media, Inc.

Graham, P.(2007). "Web 2.0". Retrieved October 5, 2014, from http://www.paulgraham.com/web20.html

Hawryszkiewycz, lgor (2004). Introduction to systems analysis and design. Pertice Hall, Australia.

Huvila, Isto (2010). Aesthetic judgments in folksonomies as criteria for organising knowledge. Conference: Paradigms and conceptual systems in knowledge organization. Proceedings of the 11th International ISKO Conference 23-26 February, Rome, Italy.

Hotho, A., Jäschke, R., Schmitz, C., & Stumme, G.(2006)."Information retrieval in folksonomies: Search and ranking". In Proceedings of the 3rd European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC2006). Budva, Montenegro: LNCS, Springer.

Keshet, Yael (2011). Classification systems in the light of sociology of knowledge. Journal of Documentation, 67(1), 144-158.

Kipp, M. E. (2006). Exploring the context of user, creator, and intermediate tagging. IA Summit 2006.Vancouver, Canada.

Knautz, Kathrin, & Stock, Wolfgang G. (2011). Collective indexing of emotions in videos", Journal of Documentation, 67(6), 975-994.

Kroski, Ellyssa (2006). The hive mind: Folksonomies and user based tagging. Infotangle blog. Retrieved October 5, 2014, from http://web20bp.com/13f1b6019/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/The-Hive-Mind-Folksonomies-2005.pdf

Mai, Erik (2011). Folksonomies and the New Order: Authority in the Digital Disorder. 115 created by the people who are engaged with the in

Matusiak, Krystyna K. (2006). Towards user-centered indexing in digital image collections.

Momtahan, Lee & et al., (2006). A Taxonomy of Web Services Using CSP, Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science, Volume 151, Issue 2, 31 May 2006, Pages 71–87.

Morrison, Jason (2007). Why Are They Tagging, and Why Do We Want Them To? Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. Volume 34, Number 1, October/November 2007. pp.12-16.

Morrison, Jason (2008). Tagging and searching: Search retrieval effectiveness of folksonomies on the World Wide. Information Processing and Management, 44 (2008) 1562–1579.

Munk, Timme Bisgaard, & Mørk, Kristian (2007). Folksonomy, the power law & the. significance of the least effort. Knowledge Organization 34(1), 16-33.

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

Noruzi, Alireza (2007). Folksonomies: Why do we need controlled vocabulary?. Webology, 4(2), editorial 12. Retrieved October 5, 2014, from http://www.webology.org/2007/v4n2/editorial12.html

Park, Peejin (2010). A conceptual framework to study folksonomic interaction. Knowledge Organization, 38(6), 515-529.

PennTags: University of Pennsylvania Public Library Tag. You're it. (2007), A high-profile instance of libraries using tagging is PennTags at the University of Pennsylvania Library. Developed for the academic community.

Peters, Isabella., & Paul Becker. (2009). Folksonomies: Indexing and Retrieval in Web 2.0. Berlin: De Gruyter/Saur, 2009.

Peters, Isabella, Kipp, M. E. I., Heck, T., Gwizdka, J., Lu, K., Neal, D. R., & Spiteri, L. (2011). Social tagging & folksonomies: Indexing, retrieving ... and beyond? Proceedings of the ASIST Annual Meeting, 48. https://doi.org/10.1002/meet.2011.14504801069

Soledad Pera1, Maria (2009), A Sophisticated Library Search Strategy Using Folksonomies and Similarity Matching.

Spiteri, Louise F. (2006). The use of folksonomies in public library catalogues. The Serials Librarian, 51(2), 75-89.

Spiteri, Louise F. (2007). Structure and form of folksonomy tags: The road to the public library catalogue. Webology, 4(2), Article 41. Retrieved October 5, 2014, from http://www.webology.org/2007/v4n2/a41.html

Sweeney, M., Maguire, M., & Shackel, B. (1993). Evaluation user-computer interaction: A framework. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 38(4), 689-711.

Vander Wal, Thomas (2007). Folksonomy definition and Wikipedia. Retrieved October 5, 2014, from http://www.vanderwal.net/random/entrysel.php?blog=1750

Voss, Jakob (2006). Collaborative thesaurus tagging the Wikipedia way. Retrieved October 5, 2014, from https://arxiv.org/abs/cs/0604036

Wikipedia contributors. (2014, October 2). Folksonomy. In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved October 2, 2014, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folksonomy

Yi, Kwan and Chan. (2009). Linking folksonomy to Library of Congress subject headings: an exploratory study. Journal of Documentation, 65(6), 872-900.


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