| « | September 2025 | » | | 日 | 一 | 二 | 三 | 四 | 五 | 六 | | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | | | | | |
|
| 统计 |
blog名称:追寻
日志总数:43
评论数量:41
留言数量:0
访问次数:101382
建立时间:2007年10月29日 |
| 
|
 [topic maps]Towards knowledge organization with Topic Maps |
夏日香气 发表于 2007/10/29 22:32:39 |
KO is interested in optimizing the organization (the conceptual access structure) of knowledge repositories in order to support easier retrieval, creation and sharing of knowledge for user communities.
A basic conviction of KO is that there exist important domains where some form of vocabulary control is beneficial. Hence the interest of KO in principles of classifications, thesauri, and ontologies.
The aim of an optimal conceptual access structure requires the careful design and steady maintenance of additional knowledge (meta-)structures. In order to provide the most useful subject access points for various user communities, indexers have to judge the potential subjects of an item within a collection from various viewpoints. This costly intellectual operation creates added value and obviously results in metadata. One is acquainted with such metadata from database indexing in the form of entries on library records, but also from subject-oriented clearinghouses (subject gateways, ) on the internet. Another form is sophisticated back-of-the-book indexing of scientific and technical writings .
（————KO和TM的关系————）
At that point we can already see the type of relation between KO and TMs: TMs are instrumental to KO, since they constitute (yet another) basic technology which KO may employ inter alia within a broader methodology in order to provide improved information retrieval and collaboration services. Therefore, TMs can indeed play an important role within KO, if they (together with other technologies) make it easier to provide innovative KO services. On the other hand, the requirements of KO help to spot what TMs are good for and what they do not achieve.
1. Content- and quality-rating agencies issuing SOAPs (e.g. quality-controlled subject gateways) and higher level content providers (e.g. abstracting and indexing agencies) crucially depend on the feature that additional knowledge structures can be expressed (as superimposed views) on top of, but independent from the original resources. No problem: After all, this is what TMs were designed for.
2. Considering the times when thesauri were updated and distributed in printed form by a central agency every few years, KO has advanced in big steps towards the decentral, collaborative creation and maintenance of knowledge structures. Instead of focussing on the statical and monolithical product, it is much more natural to view this effort as a dynamically evolving process in which domain-oriented experts constantly make small improvements. However, KO must more fully explore what this liberation from the traditional limits in non-collaborative environments implies for its methodology. A few examples: Is voluntary co-operation a substitute for central authority if we want to maintain the same quality? Do we have to reindex more often? Is every view useful? Will the ability of TMs - to "consistently" support master indices of sets of documents with different owners and maintainers - have a positive effect on the consistency at the conceptual level?
3. Highly developed KO builds complex knowledge structures with model-based indexing languages possessing a grammar. For such applications it is highly useful that with TMs you can define arbitrary structures as indexing models.
4. With the growing number and size of internetworked information resources, scalability is vital. Although, e.g., the metadata for both a research organization's library and an important literature database in one specialty is certainly large, TMs can still handle it.
5. TMs (i.e. user-editable views on information assets) further aid KO because of their flexible orientation towards usage contexts. Newer KO theory is explicitly interested in the multiple alternative views and indices which different user communities tend to build for the same item or collection. Hence, especially user-oriented indexing should benefit from TMs. This approach will exploit the scoping and filtering mechanisms of TMs to achieve adaptibility to target groups.
6. Tightly interwoven with the collaborative creation, sharing and maintenace of conceptual knowledge structures (a key activity of all knowledge workers, not only of documentalists) is the need to search and navigate in the resulting semantical structures. While this will remain an open field for decades to come, a more principled structure will always further aid usability. It is, e.g., not important if the interface is hyperbolic but rather if the underlying knowledge structure is natural and predictable.
|
阅读全文(1287) | 回复(0) | 编辑 | 精华 |
|
