|
課程名稱 |
資訊組織研討
Seminar in Information Organization |
|
開課學期 |
111-2 |
|
授課對象 |
文學院 圖書資訊學研究所 |
|
授課教師 |
藍文欽 |
|
課號 |
LIS7013 |
|
課程識別碼 |
126 M0570 |
|
班次 |
|
|
學分 |
3.0 |
|
全/半年 |
半年 |
|
必/選修 |
必修 |
|
上課時間 |
星期二2,3,4(9:10~12:10) |
|
上課地點 |
圖資編目室 |
|
備註 |
先修科目：「資訊組織一」與「資訊組織二」；或「資訊蒐集與組織」。
限碩士班以上 或 限博士班
總人數上限：20人 |
|
|
|
|
課程簡介影片 |
|
|
核心能力關聯 |
核心能力與課程規劃關聯圖 |
|
課程大綱
|
|
為確保您我的權利,請尊重智慧財產權及不得非法影印
|
|
課程概述 |
資訊組織是藉由描述資訊物件（information objects）之載體與內容，建立代表原件之替代紀錄(surrogate / representation)，並透過系統化的組織，建置成檢索工具，以幫助使用者依其資訊需求查詢、檢索、辨識、評估、及獲取資料。
本課程以本系大學部之「資訊組織一」及「資訊組織二」或碩士班之「資訊蒐集與組織」為先備課程，旨在研討圖書資訊組織與書目控制的理論基礎、原則、標準、相關問題、發展歷史與趨勢等。本課程屬於研討性質，重點在文獻研讀、分享與討論，希望藉此引領同學對資訊組織的相關議題作更深刻的探索與思考。 |
|
課程目標 |
* 熟悉資訊組織之核心概念與基本原理、原則
* 理解資訊組織相關規範與標準的意涵與功用
* 對資訊組織的新興議題與發展趨勢能有所掌握
* 對資訊組織領域的研究議題與方法能有基本認識 |
|
課程要求 |
* 本課程為研討性質，請踴躍提問及分享看法。
* 請準時出席課程 |
|
預期每週課後學習時數 |
6-8小時 |
|
Office Hours |
每週三 12:30~13:10
每週二 12:30~13:10 |
|
指定閱讀 |
請見各週指定進度 |
|
參考書目 |
課程參考資料：
＊ 卜小蝶(2007)。使用者導向之網路資源組織與檢索。臺北市：文華圖書館管理。
＊ 何光國(1990)。圖書資訊組織原理。臺北市：三民。
＊ 余顯強(2019)。XML：資訊組織與傳播核心技術。臺北市：五南。
＊ 吳美美編(2021)。圖書資訊學研究回顧與前瞻2.0。臺北市：元華文創。
＊ 陳亞寧、牛惠曼（2021）。圖書館鏈結資料入門指引。臺北市：國家圖書館。https://nclfile.ncl.edu.tw/files/202207/a0b2ff6f-97b5-4990-a400-8f12c0693d19.pdf
＊ 張慧銖(2003)。圖書館目錄發展研究。臺北市：文華圖書館管理。
＊ 張慧銖(2011)。圖書館電子資源組織：從書架到網路。新北市：華藝學術。
＊ 張慧銖等(2016)。主題分析。新北市：華藝學術。
＊ 張慧銖等(2017)。資訊組織。新北市：華藝學術。
＊ Abbas, J. (2010). Structures for organizing knowledge: Exploring taxonomies, ontologies, and other schemas. New York: Neal-Schuman Publishers.
＊ Alemu, G. (2022). The future of enriched, linked, open and filtered metadata: making sense of IFLA LRM, RDA, linked data and BIBFRAME. London: Facet Publishing.
＊ Andersen, J., & Skouvig, L. (Eds.) (2017). The organization of knowledge: Caught between global structures and local meaning. Bingley: Emerald Publishing.
＊ Angel, C., & Fuchs, C. (Eds.) (2018). Organization, representation and description through the digital age: Information in libraries, archives and museums. Berlin: De Gruyter Saur.
＊ Auer, S., Bryl, V., & Tramp, S. (Eds.) (2014). Linked open data: Creating knowledge out of interlinked data: Results of the LOD2 Project. Cham: Springer International Publishing.
＊ Baca, M. (Ed.) (2016). Introduction to metadata (3rd ed.). Los Angeles: Getty Information Institute. http://www.getty.edu/publications/intrometadata/
＊ Batley, S. (2007). Information architecture for information professionals. Oxford: Chandos.
＊ Bean, C. A., & Green, R. (2001). Relationships in the organization of knowledge. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
＊ Blair, D. C. (1990). Language and representation in information retrieval. New York: Elsevier Science Publishers.
＊ Borgman, C. L. (2000). From Gutenberg to the global information infrastructure: Access to information in the networked world. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.
＊ Bowker, G., & Star, S. L. (1999). Sorting thing out: Classification and its consequences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
＊ Broughton, V. (2015). Essential classification (2nd ed.). London: Facet Publishing.
＊ Brubaker, J. (2018). Text, lies and cataloging: Ethical treatment of deceptive works in the library. Jefferson, N.C.: McFarland & Company.
＊ Caplan, P. (2003). Metadata fundamentals for all librarians. Chicago: American Library Association, 2003.
＊ Carlson, S., Lampert, C., Melvin, D., & Washington, A. (2020). Linked data for the perplexed librarian. Chicago: ALA.
＊ Carpenter, M., & Svenonius, E. (Eds.) (1985). Foundations of cataloging: A sourcebook. Littleton, Colo.: Libraries Unlimited.
＊ Carter, R. C. (2000). Managing cataloging and the organization of information: Philosophies, practices, and challenges at the onset of the 21st century. Binghamton, NY: Haworth Information Press. [Co-published simultaneously as Cataloging & classification quarterly, v. 30, nos. 1 and 2/3]
＊ Cervone, H. F., & Svensson, L. G. (Eds.) (2015). Linked data and user interaction: The road ahead. Berlin: De Gruyter Saur.
＊ Chamber, S. (Ed.) (2013). Catalogue 2.0: The future of the library catalogue. London: Facet.
＊ Chan, L. M., Richmond, P. A., & Svenonius, E. (Eds.) (1985). Theory of subject analysis: A sourcebook. Littleton, Colo.: Libraries Unlimited.
＊ Chan, L. M., & Salaba, A. (2016). Cataloging and classification: An introduction (4th ed.). Lanham, MD.: Rowman & Littlefield.
＊ Coyle, K. (2016). FRBR before and after: A look at our bibliographic models. Chicago: ALA. http://kcoyle.net/beforeAndAfter/
＊ Coyle, K., et al. (2017). PCC SCS/LDAC Task Group on the Work Entity: Preliminary white paper. https://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/documents/PoCo-2017/WorkEntitity%20Preliminary%20White%20Paper-2017-09-27.pdf
＊ Currás, E. (2010). Ontologies, taxonomies and thesauri in systems science and systematic. Oxford: Chandos Publishing.
＊ Day, R. E. (2014). Indexing it all: The subject in the age of documentation, information, and data. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
＊ Drabenstott, K. M., & Vizine-Goetz, D. (1994). Using subject headings for online retrieval: Theory, practice, and potential. San Diego: Academic Press.
＊ Eden, B, L. (Ed.) (2016). Rethinking technical services: New frameworks, new skill sets, new tools, new roles. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield.
＊ Edwards, K. A., & Leonard, M. (Eds.) (2019). Assessment strategies in technical services (ALA Edition). Chicago: American Library Association.
＊ Foskett, A. C. (1996). The subject approach to information (5th ed.). London : Library Association Pub.
＊ Frické, M. (2012). Logic and the organization of information. New York: Springer.
＊ Garibyan, M., McLeish, S., & Paschoud, J. (2014). Access and identity management for libraries: Controlling access to online information. London: Facet.
＊ Gartner, R. (2021). Metadata in the digital library: Building an integrated strategy with XML. London: Facet.
＊ Gedikli, F. (2013). Recommender systems and the social web leveraging tagging data for recommender systems. Wiesbaden: Springer.
＊ Glushko, R. J. (Ed.). (2013). The discipline of organizing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
-- 此書之4th edition（2016）有下列三種版本，作者均提供免費下載
. Core concept edition: https://ischoolsinc.wildapricot.org/Discipline-of-Organizing-Core-Concept
. Informatics edition: https://ischoolsinc.wildapricot.org/Discipline-of-Organizing-Informatics
. Professional edition: https://berkeley.pressbooks.pub/tdo4p/ or https://ischoolsinc.wildapricot.org/Discipline-of-Organizing-Professional
＊ Gnoli, C. (2020). Introduction to knowledge organization. London: Facet.
＊ Godby, C. J., Wang, S., & Mixter, J. (2015). Library linked data in the cloud: OCLC's experiments with new models of resource description. San Rafael, California: Morgan & Claypool.
＊ Godby, J. et al. (2019). Creating library linked data with Wikibase: Lessons learned from Project Passage. Dublin, Ohio: OCLC. https://www.oclc.org/content/dam/research/publications/2019/oclcresearch-creating-library-linked-data-with-wikibase-project-passage-a4.pdf
＊ Green, R., Bean, C. A., & Myaeng, S. H. (Eds.) (2002). The semantics of relationships: An interdisciplinary perspectives. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Pub.
＊ Harpring, P. (2010). Introduction to controlled vocabularies: Terminology for art, architecture, and other cultural works (online edition). Los Angeles: Getty Research Institute. http://www.getty.edu/research/publications/electronic_publications/intro_controlled_vocab/index.html
＊ Hart, A. (2010). The RDA primer: A guide for the occasional cataloger [electronic resource]. Santa Barbara, Calif.: Linworth.
＊ Harth, A., Hose, K., & Schenkel, R. (2014). Linked data management. Boca Raton : CRC Press/Taylor & Francis.
＊ Haynes, D. (2018). Metadata for information management and retrieval: Understanding metadata and its use (2nd ed.). London: Facet Publishing.
＊ Heath, T., & Bizer, C. (2011). Linked data: Evolving the Web into a global data space. San Francisco: Morgan & Claypool. HTML version: http://linkeddatabook.com/editions/1.0/
＊ Hines, S. S. (Ed.) (2021). Technical services in the 21st century. Bingley, UK: Emerald Publishing. (Advances in Library Administration and Organization, V. 42)
＊ Hjørland, B. (1997). Information seeking and subject representation: An activity-theoretical approach to information science. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press.
＊ Hlava, M. M. K. (2015). The taxobook. San Rafael, California: Morgan & Claypool Publishers. [a 3-part series, 本校有紙本與電子版]
＊ Hodge, G. (2000). Systems of knowledge organization for digital libraries: Beyond traditional authority files. Washington, DC: The Digital Library Federation. http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub91/pub91.pdf
＊ Hoffman, G. L. (2019). Organizing library collections: Theory and practice. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
＊ Hoffman, G. L., & Snow, K. (Eds.) (2022). Cataloging and classification: Back to basics. New York: Routledge. [Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, volume 59, numbers 2/3 (Feb., 2021)之單印本]
＊ Hogan, A. (2020). The web of data. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
＊ Hooland, S. van, & Verborgh, R. (2014). Linked data for libraries, archives and museums: How to clean, link and publish your metadata. London : Facet Publishing. [Data and examples available at: http://book.freeyourmetadata.org/]
＊ Hsieh-Yee, I. (2000). Organizing audiovisual and electronic resources for access: A cataloging guide. Englewood, Colo.: Libraries Unlimited.
＊ Hsieh-Yee, I. (2016). Organizing for access with FRBR, RDA, linked data, and beyond. Santa Barbara: Libraries Unlimited.
＊ Hyvonen, E. (2012). Publishing and using cultural heritage linked data on the semantic web. San Rafael, Calif.: Morgan & Claypool.
＊ Jin, Q. (2012). Demystifying FRAD: Functional requirements for authority data. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited.
＊ Jones, E. & Seikel, M. (Eds.) (2016). Linked data for cultural heritage. Chicago: ALA.
＊ Jones, W., Ahronheim, J. R., & Crawford, J. (2002). Cataloging the Web: Metadata, AACR, and MARC 21. Lanham, Md.: Scarecrow Press.
＊ Joudrey, D. N., Taylor, A. G., & Miller, D. P. (2015). Introduction to cataloging and classification (11th ed.). Santa Barbara, California: Libraries Unlimited. [電子版]
＊ Jourdrey, D. N., & Taylor, A. G. (2018). The organization of information (4th ed.). Santa Barbara, California: Libraries Unlimited.
＊ Kelleher, J. D., & Tierney, B. (2018). Data science. Cambridge: MIT Press.
＊ King, B., & Reinold, K. (2008). Finding the concept, not just the word: A librarian’s guide to ontologies and semantics. Oxford: Chandos Publishing.
＊ Konstantinou, N., & Spanos, D.-E. (2015). Materializing the web of linked data. Cham: Springer International Publishing.
＊ Kumbhar, R. (2012). Library classification trends in the 21st century. Oxford: Chandos Pub.
Latif, A. (2011). Understanding linked open data: For linked data discovery, consumption, triplification and application development. Saarbrücken: LAP Lambert Academic Publishing.
＊ Mackey, T. P., & Jacobson, T. E. (2014). Metaliteracy: Reinventing information literacy to empower learners. Chicago: ALA.
＊ Mackey, T. P., & Jacobson, T. E. (Eds.) (2016). Metaliteracy in practice. Chicago: ALA.
＊ Mann, T. (1993). Library research models: A guide to classification, cataloging, and computers. New York : Oxford University Press.
＊ Marcella, R., & Maltby, A. (Eds.) (2000). The future of classification. Aldershot, Eng.; Brookfield, VT: Gower.
＊ Marinho, L. B., et al. (2012). Recommender systems for social tagging systems. Boston: Springer US.
＊ Maxwell, R. L. (2008). FRBR: A guide for the perplexed. Chicago: American Library Association.
＊ Miller, D. R., and Clarke, K. S. (2004). Putting XML to work in the library: Tools for improving access and management. Chicago: American Library Association.
＊ Miller, S. J. (Ed.) (2022). Subject analysis methodologies. New York: Magnum Publishing.
＊ Mitchell, A. M., & Surratt, B. E. (2005). Cataloging and organizing digital resources: A how-to-do-it manual for librarians. London: Facet Publishing.
＊ Mugridge, R. L. (Ed.) (2019). Assessment of cataloging and metadata services. London: Routledge.
＊ Oliver, C. (2021). Introducing RDA: A guide to the basics after 3R (2nd ed.). Chicago: American Library Association.
＊ Olson, H. A., & Boll, J. J. (2001). Subject analysis in online catalogs. Englewood, Colo.: Libraries Unlimited.
＊ Park, J.-R., & Howarth, L. C. (Eds.) (2013). New directions in information organization. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald.
＊ Pennington, D. R., Spiteri, L. F. (Eds.) (2019). Social tagging in a linked data environment. London: Facet Publishing.
＊ Peters, I. (2009). Folksonomies: Indexing and retrieval in Web 2.0 (P. Becker, trans.). Berlin: De Gruyter/Saur.
＊ Peters, T. A. (1991). The online catalog: A critical examination. Jefferson: McFarland.
＊ Pomerantz, J. (2015). Metadata. Cambridge: The MIT Press. [中譯本：Metadata後設資料（臺北市: 經濟新潮社，2021）]
＊ Porumbeanu Madge, O.-L., et al. (2017). Ethical issues in library and information science. United Kingdom: Koros Press Limited.
＊ Raieli, R. (2022). Web-scale discovery services: Principles, applications, discovery tools and development hypotheses (trans. E. Corradini). Cambridge, MA: Candos Publishing.
＊ Rietveld, L. (2016). Publishing and consuming linked data: Optimizing for the unknown. Berline: IOS Press.
＊ Rosenfeld, L., Morville, P., & Arango, J. (2015). Information architecture: For the web and beyond (4th ed.). Sebastopol, CA: O'Reilly Media. [中譯本：資訊架構學(臺北市：碁峰資訊, 2017)]
＊ Rowley, J., & Farrow, J. (2002). Organizing knowledge: An introduction to managing access to information (3rd ed.). Aldershot: Ashgate.
＊ Sandberg, J. (Ed.) (2019). Ethical questions in name authority control. Sacramento: Library Juice Press.
＊ Sandberg-Fox, A. M. (2001). Proceedings of the bicentennial conference on bibliographic control for the new millennium: Confronting the challenges of networked resources and the Web. Washington, DC : Library of Congress, Cataloging Distribution Service. http://www.loc.gov/catdir/bibcontrol/conference.html
＊ Schwartz, C. (2001). Sorting out the Web: Approaches to subject access. Westport, Conn.: Ablex Pub.
＊ Shera, J. H., & Egan, M. E. (Eds.) (1951). Bibliographic organization: Papers presented before the Fifteenth Annual Conference of the Graduate Library School, July 24-29, 1950. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
＊ Sicilia, M.-A. (Ed.) (2014). Handbook of metadata, semantics and ontologies. Singapore: World Scientific.
＊ Sikos, L. F. (2015) Mastering structured data on the semantic web. Berkeley, CA: Apress.
＊ Smiraglia, R. P. (2001). The nature of a work: Implications for the organization of knowledge. Lanham, Md.: Scarecrow Press.
＊ Smiraglia, R. P. (Ed.) (2002). Works as entities for information retrieval. New York: Haworth Information Press. [Co-published simultaneously as Cataloging & classification quarterly, v. 33, nos. 3/4]
＊ Smiraglia, R. P. (2014). The elements of knowledge organization. Cham: Springer International Publishing.
＊ Smiraglia, R. P. (2015). Domain analysis for knowledge organization: Tools for ontology extraction. Waltham, MA: Chandos Publishing.
＊ Smiraglia, R. P., & Lee, H.-L. (Eds.) (2012). Cultural frames of knowledge. Wurzburg: Ergon-Verlag.
＊ Smiraglia, R. P., & Lee, H.-L. (Eds.) (2015). Ontology for knowledge organization. Wurzburg: Ergon-Verlag.
＊ Smiraglia, R. P., Riva, P., & Žumer, M. (Eds.) (2013). The FRBR family of conceptual models: Toward a linked bibliographic future. London: Routledge. [Co-published simultaneously as Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, vol. 50, issue 5-7]
＊ Smith, G. (2008). Tagging: People-powered metadata for the social web. Berkeley, CA: New Riders. [簡體字中譯本：《標籤系統:為社會化網路注入源於用戶的元數據》]
＊ Smith-Yoshimura, K. (2020). Transitioning to the next generation of metadata. Dublin, OH: OCLC Research. https://doi.org/10.25333/rqgd-b343
＊ Spiteri, L. F. (Ed.) (2016). Managing metadata in web-scale discovery systems. London: Facet Publishing.
＊ Stock, W. G., & Stock, M. (2015). Handbook of information science. Berlin: De Gruyter.
＊ Stuart, D. (2011). Facilitating access to the web of data: A guide for librarians. London: Facet Publishing.
＊ Stuart, D. (2016). Practical ontologies for information professionals. London: Facet Publishing.
＊ Svenonius, E. (Ed.) (1989). The conceptual foundations of descriptive cataloging. San Diego: Academic Press.
＊ Svenonius, E. (2000). The intellectual foundation of information organization. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2000.
＊ Sylva, L. (Ed.) (2014). Cataloging and classification: trends, transformations, teaching, and training. Uxbridge: Koros.
＊ Szostak, R., Gnoli, C., & López-Huertas, M. (2016). Interdisciplinary knowledge organization. Cham: Springer International Publishing.
＊ Taylor, A. G. (Ed.) (2007). Understanding FRBR: What it is and how it will affect our retrieval tools. Westport, Conn.: Libraries Unlimited.
＊ W3C (2014a). RDF 1.1 primer. https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-primer/
＊ W3C (2014b). RDF 1.1 Concepts and Abstract Syntax. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/
＊ Williamson, N. J., & Beghtol, C. (Eds.) (2003). Knowledge organization and classification in international information retrieval. Binghamton, N.Y.: Haworth Information Press. [Co-published simultaneously as Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, volume 37, numbers 1/2]
＊ Williamson, N. J., & Hudon, M. (1992). Classification research for knowledge representation and organization. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
＊ Wilson, P. (1968). Two kinds of power: An essay on bibliographical control. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
＊ Wood, D., Zaidman, M., & Ruth, L. (2014). Linked data: Structured data on the Web. Shelter Island: Manning.
＊ Zhang, Y., & Salaba, A. (2009). Implementing FRBR in libraries: Key issues and future directions. New York: Neal-Schuman Publishers.
＊ Zeng, M. L., & Qin, J. (2022). Metadata (3rd ed.). London: Facet Publishing.
[Companion Website: http://metadataetc.org/book-website2nd/]
＊ Žumer, M., Zeng, M. L., & Salaba, A. (2012). FRSAD: Conceptual modeling of aboutness. Santa Barbara, Calif.: Libraries Unlimited.
[Useful Web Sites]
＊ ISKO Knowledge Organization Literature http://www.isko.org/lit.html
＊ ISKO Encyclopedia for Knowledge Organization http://www.isko.org/cyclo/
＊ Knowledge Organization 電子版：https://www.nomos-elibrary.de/zeitschrift/0943-7444
＊ Proceedings from North American Symposium on Knowledge Organization (NASKO) https://journals.lib.washington.edu/index.php/nasko/index
＊ Cataloging and Metadata Commons http://network.bepress.com/social-and-behavioral-sciences/library-and-information-science/cataloging-and-metadata/
＊ Concepts in Library & Information Science and Knowledge Organization compiled by Birger Hjørland https://web.archive.org/web/20160529183249/http://www.iva.dk/bh/Core%20Concepts%20in%20LIS/home.htm
＊ The Epistemological Lifeboat: Epistemology and Philosophy of Science for Information Scientists compiled by Birger Hjørland and Jeppe Nicolaisen. https://web.archive.org/web/20180226161042/http://lifeboat.iva.ku.dk/
＊ Lifeboat for Knowledge Organization compiled by Birger Hjørland http://arkiv.iva.ku.dk/kolifeboat/ or https://web.archive.org/web/20181213150550/http://arkiv.inf.ku.dk/KoLifeboat/index.htm
＊ Wikidata: WikiProject PCC Wikidata Pilot https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_PCC_Wikidata_Pilot |
|
評量方式
(僅供參考) |
|
No. |
項目 |
百分比 |
說明 |
|
1. |
課堂報告（Class presentations） |
10% |
每週有三篇指定文獻，分別由三位同學負責導讀及引導討論。
負責導讀的同學請準備問題，至少邀請兩位同學進行討論。 |
2. |
課堂參與 |
10% |
本課程為研討性質，請踴躍提問及分享看法。 |
3. |
各週指定閱讀之摘要 |
15% |
針對每週指定閱讀之三篇文獻，每篇各撰寫300-500字摘要，每週上課時繳交 |
4. |
閱讀心得 |
15% |
請就以下四篇擇一 ，撰寫讀後心得報告 [繳交日期：5/2]。
請先寫一頁摘要，再撰寫3-4頁心得。字體請選12號字，行距採1.5行間距。
＊ Coyle, K. (2016). FRBR before and after: A look at our bibliographic models. Chicago: ALA. http://kcoyle.net/beforeAndAfter/
＊ PCC SCS/LDAC Task Group on the Work Entity (2017). Preliminary white paper. https://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/documents/PoCo-2017/WorkEntitity%20Preliminary%20White%20Paper-2017-09-27.pdf
＊ ARL Task Force on Wikimedia and Linked Open Data (2019). ARL white paper on Wikidata: Opportunities and recommendations. https://www.arl.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/2019.04.18-ARL-white-paper-on-Wikidata.pdf
＊ Smith-Yoshimura, K. (2020). Transitioning to the next generation of metadata. Dublin, OH: OCLC Research. https://doi.org/10.25333/rqgd-b343 |
5. |
期末作業：Literature review term paper |
50% |
[繳交日期：6月13日 中午12:00 以前]
＊ 請參考Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (ARIST)，以此作為撰寫文獻回顧的範例。另可參見ISKO Knowledge Organization Literature (https://www.isko.org/lit.html)，選擇class中02 Literature Review in KO (https://www.isko.org/kolit.php?cl=02&au=&ti=&da=&la=)
＊ 原則上，收錄範圍建議自2000年後迄今。但若所選題材較新，則從其出現的年份開始。作業所分析的文獻量，至少需在二十篇以上[能力所及，當然多多益善]。
＊ 請於4月11日繳交一頁note，說明你的題目、研究重點與範圍、資料蒐集方法等。原則上，希望同學的題目不重複；若有重複，我們另行協調處理。
＊ 學期最後兩週安排課堂報告，由每位同學分享文獻回顧的發現與心得。
＊ 文字報告的格式，字體請選12號字，行距採1.5行間距。
＊ 請遵守學術規範的要求，並依APA或Chicago Style（二者擇一）提供引文註釋與參考書目，請注意操作上之一致性與正確性。若作業經確認為抄襲者，作業不予計分。
＊ 原則上，與資訊組織、知識組織、metadata等相關的主題均可考慮，若選題有疑慮，請先與授課教師約時間商榷。
＊ Example:
1. Bossaller, J. S., & Snady, H. M. (2017). Documenting the conversation: A systematic review of library discovery layers. College and Research Libraries, 78(5), 602-619. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.78.5.602
2. Gardner, S. A. (2012). Cresting toward the sea change: Literature review of cataloging and classification, 2009-2010. Library Resources & Technical Services, 56(2), 64-79.
3. Mora-Cantallops, M., Sánchez-Alonso, S. and García-Barriocanal, E. (2019). A systematic literature review on Wikidata. Data Technologies and Applications, 53(3), 250-268. https://doi.org/10.1108/DTA-12-2018-0110
4. Zhao, F. (2022). A systematic review of Wikidata in digital humanities projects. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities. https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqac083
|
|
|
針對學生困難提供學生調整方式 |
|
上課形式 |
|
|
作業繳交方式 |
延長作業繳交期限, 學生與授課老師協議改以其他形式呈現 |
|
考試形式 |
|
|
其他 |
由師生雙方議定 |
|
|
週次 |
日期 |
單元主題 |
|
第1週 |
2/21 |
Introduction / Bibliographic Control in General / Trends
藍文欽(2021) 資訊組織研究文獻回顧（2010-2020）。在吳美美編，圖書資訊學研究回顧與前瞻2.0，第一章。
基本概念回顧，任意瀏覽至少下列文獻之一：
Chan, L. M., & Salaba, A. (2016). Cataloging and classification: An introduction (4th ed.). Lanham, MD.: Rowman & Littlefield. Chapter 1.
Joudrey, D. N., & Taylor, A. G. (2018). The organization of information (4th ed.). Westport, Conn.: Libraries Unlimited. Chapter 1.
Joudrey, D. N., Taylor, A. G., & Miller, D. P. (2015). Introduction to cataloging and classification (11th ed.). Santa Barbara: Libraries Unlimited. Chapter 1.
Rubin, R. E. (2016). Foundations of library and information science (4th ed.). Chicago: Neal-Schuman. Chapter 6.
Rosenfeld, L., Morville, P., & Arango, J. (2015). Information architecture: For the Web and beyond (4th ed.). Beijing: O’Reilly. Chapter 2 & 5. |
|
第2週 |
2/28 |
放假 |
|
第3週 |
3/7 |
Foundations for Knowledge Organization (KO)
導讀同學：曹詠甯、凌程媚、嚴采綸
Gnoli (2020). Introduction to knowledge organization. Chapter 1, Focusing the field
Gnoli (2020). Introduction to knowledge organization. Chapter 2, Theories of knowledge organization
Gnoli (2020). Introduction to knowledge organization. Chapter 3, Structural principles in knowledge organization
[延伸閱讀]
Andersen, J., & Skouvig, L. (2006). Knowledge organization: A sociohistorical analysis and critique. The Library Quarterly, 76(3), 300-322.
Glushko, R. J. (Ed.) (2016). The discipline of organizing (4th ed. Core concept ed.). Chapter 1, Foundations for organizing systems. https://ischoolsinc.wildapricot.org/resources/Documents/Discipline%20of%20organizing/Core%20Concepts/TDO4-Core-CC-Chapter1.pdf
Hider, P. (2018). The terminological and disciplinary origins of information and knowledge organization. Education for Information, 34(1), 135-61.
Hjørland, B. (2016). Knowledge organization. Knowledge Organization, 43(6), 475-84. Also available in ISKO Encyclopedia of Knowledge Organization, http://www.isko.org/cyclo/knowledge_organization |
|
第4週 |
3/14 |
Fundamental Issues (cont.)
導讀同學：洪培洛、周示嚴、陳婷妤
Shera, J. H. (1965). Foundations of a theory of bibliography. In J. H. Shera, Libraries and the organization of knowledge (pp. 18-33).
Smiraglia, R. P. (2014). “About theory of knowledge organization” & “Philosophy: Underpinnings of knowledge organization” In The elements of knowledge organization (pp. 7-32).
Wilson, P. (1968). Two kinds of power: An essay on bibliographical control. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Chapter 2, Describing and exploiting. [可參考下列文章中作者對Wilson觀點的解讀：White, H. D. (2019). Patrick Wilson. Knowledge Organization, 46(4), 279-307. Also available in ISKO Encyclopedia of Knowledge Organization, http://www.isko.org/cyclo/wilson]
[延伸閱讀]
Hjørland, B. (2013). Theories of knowledge organization: Theories of knowledge. Knowledge Organization, 40(3), 169-181.
Mai, J-E. (1999). A postmodern theory of knowledge organization. Proceedings of the ASIS Annual Meeting, 36, 547-556. http://jenserikmai.info/Papers/1999_APostmodernTheoryOfKnowledgeOrganization.pdf
Smiraglia, R. P. (2002). The progress of theory in knowledge organization. Library Trends, 50 (3), 330–349. |
|
第5週 |
3/21 |
Units in Information Organization: Resources / Bibliographic Entities / Work
導讀同學：楊東凱、林孝宜、莊婷婷
Glushko, R. J. (Ed.) (2016). The discipline of organizing (4th ed. Core concept ed.). Chapter 4, Resources in organizing systems. https://ischoolsinc.wildapricot.org/resources/Documents/Discipline%20of%20organizing/Core%20Concepts/TDO4-Core-CC-Chapter4.pdf
Svenonius, E. (2000). The intellectual foundation of information organization. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Chapter 3, Bibliographic Entities.
Holden, C. (2020). The bibliographic work: History, theory, and practice. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 59(2/3), 77-96.
[延伸閱讀]
關於work較詳細的討論，請參考專書：Smiraglia, R. P. (2001). The nature of a work: Implications for the organization of knowledge. Lanham, Md.: Scarecrow Press.
Coyle, K. (2016). FRBR before and after: A look at our bibliographic models. Chap. 1, The Work (pp. 3-28). [The author provides an e-book which is available from http://kcoyle.net/beforeAndAfter/978-0-8389-1364-2.pdf]
Hjørland, B. (n. d.). Units or entities in knowledge organization (KO). What is being organized? https://arkiv.iva.ku.dk//kolifeboat/HISTORY%20&%20THEORY/units_in_knowledge_organization.htm
Smiraglia, R. P. (2019). Work. Knowledge Organization, 46(4), 308-319. Also available in ISKO Encyclopedia of Knowledge Organization, http://www.isko.org/cyclo/work
Wilson, P. (1968). The bibliographic universe. In Two kinds of power: An essay on bibliographic control (pp.6-19).
Yee, M. M.所撰 “What is a work?” Part 1-Part 4 系列文章(分期刊載於Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, v.19-v.20) |
|
第6週 |
3/28 |
FRBR / IFLA LRM
導讀同學：陳智誠、張詠琳、劉沁琳
Taylor, A. G. (2007). An introduction to Functional Requirement for Bibliographic Records (FRBR). In A. G. Taylor (Ed), Understanding FRBR: What it is and how it will affect our retrieval tools (pp. 1-19). Westport, Conn.: Libraries Unlimited.
Žumer, M. (2018). IFLA Library Reference Model (IFLA LRM): Harmonisation of the FRBR family. Knowledge Organization, 45(4), 310-318. Also available from ISKO Encyclopedia of Knowledge Organization, http://http://www.isko.org/cyclo/lrm
[Note: 上列兩篇由同一位同學導讀]
Pisanski, J., & Žumer, M. (2012). User verification of the FRBR conceptual model. Journal of Documentation, 68(4), 582-592.
Arastoopoor, S. (2020). Users' perception of navigating bibliographic families from IFLA-LRM perspective. Library Hi Tech, 40(1), 265-280. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHT-12-2019-0240
[Note: 上列兩篇由同一位同學導讀]
Strader, C. R. (2021). Cataloging to support information literacy: The IFLA Library Reference Model’s user tasks in the context of the Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 59(5), 442-476. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2021.1939828
[延伸閱讀]
IFLA Study Group on the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (2009). Functional requirements for bibliographic records: Final report. https://cdn.ifla.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/assets/cataloguing/frbr/frbr_2008.pdf
Riva, P., Le Bœuf, P., & Žumer, M. (2017). IFLA Library Reference Model: A conceptual model for bibliographic information (2017 rev.) https://repository.ifla.org/bitstream/123456789/40/1/ifla-lrm-august-2017_rev201712.pdf
Pisanski, J., & Žumer, M. (2010a). Mental models of the bibliographic universe. Part 1, Mental models of descriptions. Journal of Documentation, 66(5), 643–668.
Pisanski, J., & Žumer, M. (2010b). Mental models of the bibliographic universe. Part 2, Comparison tasks and conclusions. Journal of Documentation, 66(5), 668–680.
Budanović, M. P., & Žumer, M. (2021a). Prototype cataloging interface based on the IFLA Library Reference Model (LRM). Part 1: Conceptual design. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 59(7), 619-643.
Budanović, M. P., & Žumer, M. (2021b). Prototype cataloging interface based on the IFLA Library Reference Model (LRM). Part 2: Usability evaluation. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 59(7), 644-668. |
|
第7週 |
4/4 |
放假 |
|
第8週 |
4/11 |
RDF / Linked Data
[繳交期末報告題目概述]
導讀同學：丁昱寧、林廣琦、曹詠甯
基本背景：
Berners-Lee, T. (2006). Linked data. Retrieved from https://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html
W3C (2014). RDF 1.1 primer. Retrieved from https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-primer/
[本週指定閱讀]：
Allemang, D., & Hendler, J. (2011). Semantic Web for the Working Ontologist modeling in RDFS and OWL (2nd ed.). Waltham, MA: Morgan Kaufmann/Elsevier. Chapter 3, RDF--The basis of the Semantic Web.
Bushman, B., Anderson, D., & Fu, G. (2015). Transforming the Medical Subject Headings into Linked Data: Creating the authorized version of MeSH in RDF. Journal of Library Metadata, 15(3/4), 157-176. https://doi.org/10.1080/19386389.2015.1099967
Ullah, I., Khusro, S., Ullah, A., & Naeem, M. (2018). An Overview of the Current State of Linked and Open Data in Cataloging. Information Technology and Libraries, 37(4), 47-80. https://doi.org/10.6017/ital.v37i4.10432
[Examples & Useful Sites]
Library of Congress. Linked Data Services: Authorities and Vocabularies http://id.loc.gov/
Getty Vocabularies as Linked Open Data http://www.getty.edu/research/tools/vocabularies/lod/
OCLC Linked Data https://www.oclc.org/developer/develop/linked-data.en.html
VIAF Linked Data http://viaf.org/viaf/data/
臺灣鏈結資源系統 LDT@Library https://ld.ncl.edu.tw/
EUCLID Linked Data Training Modules -- http://euclid-project.eu/index.html
Free Your Metadata: Learn how to get more value out of metadata easily. http://freeyourmetadata.org/ [由Linked Data for Libraries, Archives, and Museums一書的作者現身說法，提供詳細步驟與資料，帶領學習者逐步掌握如何做]
[延伸閱讀]
陳淑君（2021）。從知識本體及鏈結資料角度探討數位人文學的資訊組織與檢索。在吳美美編，圖書資訊學研究回顧與前瞻2.0，第二章。
陳亞寧（2020）。書目資訊鏈結資料化方法之研究：書目本體論、鏈結型機讀編目與Schema.org。教育資料與圖書館學，57(3)，379-412。 https://doi.org/10.6120/JoEMLS.202011_57(3).0017.OR.AM
Alemu, G., Stevens, B., Ross, P., & Chandler, J. (2012). Linked data for libraries: Benefits of a conceptual shift from library-specific record structures to RDF-based data models. New Library World, 113(11-12), 549-570.
Gandon, F., Krummenacher, R., Han, S.-K., & Toma, I. (2011). Semantic annotation and retrieval: RDF. In J. Domingue, D. Fensel, & J. A. Hendler (Eds.), Handbook of semantic web technologies (pp.119-155). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.
Heath, T., & Bizer, C. (2011). Linked data: Evolving the Web into a global data space. San Francisco: Morgan & Claypool. Chap. 1 & 2. [HTML version: http://linkeddatabook.com/editions/1.0/]
Lampert, C. K., & Southwick, S. B. (2013). Leading to Linking: Introducing linked data to academic library digital collections, Journal of Library Metadata, 13(2/3), 230-253. DOI: 10.1080/19386389.2013.826095
Mixter, J. (2014). Using a common model: Mapping VRA Core 4.0 into an RDF ontology. Journal of Library Metadata, 14(1), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1080/19386389.2014.891890
Williams, J. (2021). From silo to the Web: Library cataloging data in an open environment. In S. S. Hines (Ed.), Technical services in the 21st century (p. 175-191). Bingley, UK: Emerald Publishing. (Advances in Library Administration and Organization, 42, 175-191.) |
|
第9週 |
4/18 |
Resources Description / Cataloging Rules
導讀同學：凌程媚、嚴采綸、洪培洛
Glushko, R. J. (Ed.). (2016). The discipline of organizing (4th ed. Core Concepts ed.). Chapter 5, Resources Description and Metadata. https://ischoolsinc.wildapricot.org/resources/Documents/Discipline%20of%20organizing/Core%20Concepts/TDO4-Core-CC-Chapter5.pdf
Dobreski, B. (2020). Descriptive cataloging: The history and practice of describing library resources. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 59(2/3), 225-241. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2020.1864693
Oliver, C. (2021). Introducing RDA: A guide to the basics after 3R (2nd ed.). Chicago: ALA. Chapter 5, RDA: Some key aspects.
[延伸閱讀]
Bernstein, S. (2014). Beyond content, media, and carrier: RDA carrier characteristics. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 52(5), 463-486.
Biswas, S. (2015). Reflections of Ranganathan's normative principles of cataloging in RDA. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 53(8), 948-963.
Hider, P. & Liu, Y.-H. (2013). The use of RDA elements in support of FRBR user tasks. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 51 (8), 857-872.
Riva, P., & Oliver, C. (2012). Evaluation of RDA as an implementation of FRBR and FRAD. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 50 (5-7), 564-586.
Taniguchi, S. (2015). Modeling resource description tasks in RDA. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 53(1), 88-111. |
|
第10週 |
4/25 |
OPACs / Discovery Services / Catalog Assessment
導讀同學：周示嚴、陳婷妤、楊東凱
Raieli, R. (2022). Web-scale discovery services: Principles, applications, discovery tools and development hypotheses. Chapter 2, The evolution of the search systems.
Raieli, R. (2022). Web-scale discovery services: Principles, applications, discovery tools and development hypotheses. Chapter 3, Search and discovery tools. [3.2 The main discovery systems 瀏覽即可]
Pettitt, K. (2019). Cataloging and metadata assessment: An overview. In K. A. Edwards, & M. Leonard (Eds.), Assessment strategies in technical services (pp.155-182). Chicago: ALA.
[延伸閱讀]
Barton, J., & Mak, L. (2012). Old hopes, new possibilities: Next-generation catalogues and the centralization of access. Library Trends, 61(1), 83-106.
Breeding, M. (2014). Discovery product functionality. Library Technology Reports, 50(1), 5-32.
Breeding, M. (2015). The future of library resource discovery: A white paper commissioned by the NISO Discovery to Delivery (D2D) Topic Committee. Baltimore: NISO. https://groups.niso.org/apps/group_public/download.php/14487/future_library_resource_discovery.pdf
Hider, P., & Tan, K.-C. (2008). Constructing record quality: Measures based on catalog use. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 46(4), 338-361.
Petrucciani, A. (2015). Quality of library catalogs and value of (good) catalogs. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 53 (3/4), 303-313.
Snow, K. (2017). Defining, assessing, and rethinking quality cataloging. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 55 (7/8), 438-455.
Wells, D. (2020). Online public access catalogues and library discovery systems. In ISKO Encyclopedia of Knowledge Organization, https://www.isko.org/cyclo/opac
Note: 另一值得留意的發展是open source discovery service tools, e.g., https://devopscube.com/open-source-service-discovery/ ; https://stackshare.io/service-discovery |
|
第11週 |
5/2 |
Bibliographic Relationships / Catalog Use / Classification
[繳交讀書心得報告]
導讀同學：林孝宜、莊婷婷、陳智誠
Tillett, B. B. (2001). Bibliographic relationships. In C. A. Bean, & R. Green (Eds), Relationships in the organization of knowledge (pp. 19-35). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Markey, K. (2007) Twenty-five years of end-user searching, Part 1: research findings. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58 (8), 1071-1081. Part 2: Future research directions. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58 (8), 1123-1130.
Kwasnik, B. (1999). The role of classification in knowledge representation and discovery. Library Trends, 48(1), 22-47.
[延伸閱讀]
Green, R. (2001). Relationships in the organization of knowledge: An overview. In C. A. Bean, & R. Green (Eds), Relationships in the organization of knowledge (pp. 3-18). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Moreira, W., & Martínez-Ávila, D. (2018). Concept relationships in knowledge organization systems: Elements for analysis and common research among fields. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 56(1), 19-39, https://doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2017.1357157
Niu, J. (2013). Hierarchical relationships in the bibliographic universe. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 51(5), 473-490.
Park, T. K., & Morrison, A. M. (2017). The nature and characteristics of bibliographic relationships in RDA cataloging records in OCLC at the beginning of RDA implementation. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 55 (6), 361-386.
Picco, P., & Ortiz Repiso, V. (2012). The contribution of FRBR to the identification of bibliographic relationships: The new RDA-based ways of representing relationships in catalogs. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 50(5-7), 622-640.
Tillett, B. B. (1991). A taxonomy of bibliographic relationships. Library Resources & Technical Services, 35, 150-158.
Wallheim, H. (2016). From complex reality to formal description: Bibliographic relationships and problems of operationalization in RDA. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 54(7), 483-503.
[Catalog Use ]
Borgman, C. L. (1996). Why are online catalogs still hard to use?" Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 47(7): 493-503.
Markey, K. (2007). The online library catalog: Paradise lost and paradise regained? D-Lib Magazine, 13(1/2). Retrieved from: http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january07/markey/01markey.html
Miksa, F. (2009). Information organization and the mysterious information user. Libraries & the Cultural Record, 44(3), 343–372.
Novotny, E. (2004). I don't think I click: A protocol analysis study of use of a library online catalog in the Internet age. College & Research Libraries, 65(6), 525-537.
Waller, V. (2010). Accessing the collection of a large public library: An analysis of OPAC use. LIBRES: Library & Information Science Research Electronic Journal, 20(1), 1-27.
Wilson, R., & Given, L. M. (2010). The effect of spelling and retrieval system familiarity on search behavior in online public access catalogs: A mixed methods study. Journal of The American Society For Information Science & Technology, 61(12), 2461-2476.
Wilson, V. (2015). Catalog users “in the wild”: The potential of an ethnographic approach to studies of library catalogs and their users. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 53(2), 190-213.
[Classification ]
Beghtol, C. 1. (1986). Bibliographic classification theory and text linguistics: Aboutness analysis, intertextuality and the cognitive act of classifying documents. Journal of Documentation, 42, 84-113.
Barité, M. (2018). Literary warrant. Knowledge Organization, 45(6), 517-536. Also available in ISKO Encyclopedia of Knowledge Organization, http://www.isko.org/cyclo/literary_warrant
Clarke, R. I. (2021). Library classification systems in the U.S.: Basic ideas and examples. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 59(2/3), 203-224.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2021.1881008
Frické, M. (2013). Reflections on classification: Thomas Reid and bibliographic description. Journal of Documentation, 69(4), 507-522.
Hjørland, B. (2013). Facet analysis: The logical approach to knowledge organization. Information Processing and Management, 49(2), 545–57. Also available online from IEKO: https://www.isko.org/cyclo/facet_analysis
Hjørland, B. (2017). Classification. Knowledge Organization, 44(2), 97-128. Also available in ISKO Encyclopedia of Knowledge Organization, http://www.isko.org/cyclo/classification
Rosenfeld, L., Morville, P., & Arango, J. (2015). Information architecture for the Web and beyond. Beijing: O’Reilly. Chapter 6, Organization Systems (pp. 97-131).
Shera, J. H. (1965). Classification as the basis of bibliographic organization. In Libraries and the organization of knowledge (pp. 77-96). London: Crosby Lockwook & Son.
Smiraglia, R. P., & den Heuvel, C. V. (2013). Classifications and concepts: Towards an elementary theory of knowledge interaction. Journal of Documentation, 69(3), 360-383.
Svenonius, E. (1992). Classification: Prospects, problems and possibilities. In N. J. Williamson, & M. Hudon (Eds.), Classification research for knowledge representation and organization (pp. 5-25). Amsterdam: Elsevier. |
|
第12週 |
5/9 |
Subject Analysis – Verbal / Indexing / Aboutness
導讀同學：張詠琳、劉沁琳、丁昱寧
請瀏覽
*MeSH Browser -- http://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/2007/MBrowser.html
*Unified Medical Language System (UMLS) -- http://www.nlm.nih.gov/research/umls/umlsmain.html http://www.nlm.nih.gov/research/umls/pdf/UMLS_Basics.pdf
*Weinberg, B. H. (1988). Why indexing fails the researcher. The Indexer, 16(1): 3-6.
[本週閱讀資料]
Smith, C. (2021). Controlled vocabularies: Past, present and future of subject access. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 59(2/3), 186-202.
Hjørland, B. (2018). Indexing: Concepts and theory. Knowledge Organization, 45(7), 609-39. Also available in ISKO Encyclopedia of Knowledge Organization, http://www.isko.org/cyclo/indexing
Holley, R. M., & Joudrey, D. N. (2020). Aboutness and conceptual analysis: A review. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 59(2/3), 159-186. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2020.1856992
[延伸閱讀]
Gross, T., Taylor, A. G., & Joudrey, D. N. (2015). Still a lot to lose: The role of controlled vocabulary in keyword searching. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 53(1), 1-39.
Furner, J. (2012). FRSAD and the ontology of subjects of works. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 50(5-7), 494-516. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2012.681269
Harper, C. A. & Tillett, B. B. (2007). Library of Congress controlled vocabularies and their application to the Semantic Web. Cataloging and Classification Quarterly, 43 (3/4), 47-68.
Hjorland, B. (2001). Towards a theory of aboutness, subject, topicality, theme, domain, field, content ... and relevance. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 52(9), 774-778.
Martínez-Ávila, D. & Budd, J. M. (2017). Epistemic warrant for categorizational activities and the development of controlled vocabularies. Journal of Documentation, 73 (4), 700-715.
Rondeau, S. (2014). The life and times of aboutness: A review of the library and information science literature. Evidence Based Library & Information Practice, 9(1). Retrieved from https://journals.library.ualberta.ca/eblip/index.php/EBLIP/article/view/19091/16224
Svenonius, E. (2000). The intellectual foundation of information organization. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Chapter 8, Subject Language: Introduction, Vocabulary Selection, and Classification |
|
第13週 |
5/16 |
Domain Analysis / Tagging / Cataloging Ethics
導讀同學：林廣琦、曹詠甯、凌程媚
瀏覽：
吳筱玫（2009）。俗民分類與知識型：Tag的資訊秩序,。中華傳播學刊, 15, 頁3-31。 Available from http://cjc.nccu.edu.tw/word/283312142013.pdf
[本週閱讀資料]
Hjørland, B. (2002). Domain analysis in information science. Eleven approaches — traditional as well as innovative. Journal of Documentation, 58 (4), 422-462.
Rafferty, P. (2018). Tagging. Knowledge Organization, 45 (6), 500-516. Also available in ISKO Encyclopedia of Knowledge Organization, http://www.isko.org/cyclo/tagging
Martin, J. M. (2021). Records, responsibility, and power: An overview of cataloging ethics. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 59(2/3), 281-304. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2020.1871458
[延伸閱讀]
[Domain Analysis]
Hjørland, B. (2016). Domain analysis. Knowledge Organization 44, no. 6: 436-464. Also available from: http://www.isko.org/cyclo/domain_analysis
López-Huertas, M. J. (2015). Domain analysis for interdisciplinary knowledge domains. Knowledge Organization, 42 (8), 570-580.
Smiraglia, R. P. (2015). Domain analysis as a methodological paradigm in knowledge organization. In Domain analysis for knowledge organization: Tools for ontology extraction (pp.19-39).
[Tagging/Folksonomy]
Bullard, J. (2018). Curated folksonomies: Three implementations of structure through human judgment. Knowledge Organization, 45(8), 643-652.
Gerolimos, M. (2013). Tagging for libraries: A review of the effectiveness of tagging systems for library catalogs. Journal of Library Metadata, 13 (1), 36-58.
Kipp, M. I., & Campbell, D. G. (2010). Searching with tags: Do tags help users find things? Knowledge Organization, 37(4), 239-255.
Munk, T. B., & Mørk, K. (2007). Folksonomy, The power law & the significance of the least effort. Knowledge Organization, 34(1), 16-33.
Spiteri, L. F. (2010). Incorporating facets into social tagging applications: An analysis of current trends. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 48(1), 94-109.
Trant, J. (2009). Studying social tagging and folksonomy: A review and framework. Journal of Digital Information, 10(1). Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10150/105375
Windleharth, T. W., Jett, J., Schmalz, M., & Lee, J. H. (2016). Full steam ahead: A conceptual analysis of user-supplied tags on steam. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 54(7), 418-441.
[Cataloging Ethics]
Chan, M., Danielsb, J., Furgerc, S., Rasmussenh, D., Shoemaker, E., & Snow, K. (2022). The development and future of the cataloguing code of ethics. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 60(8), 786-806.
Olson, H., & Schlege, R. (2001). Standardization, objectivity, and user focus: A Meta-analysis of subject access critiques. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 32(2), 61-80.
Ridi, R. (2013). Ethical values for knowledge organization. Knowledge Organization, 40(3), 187-196.
Sandberg, J. (Ed.) (2019). Ethical questions in name authority control. Sacramento, CA: Library Juice Press.
Smiraglia, R. P. (2009). Bibliocentrism, cultural warrant, and the ethics of resource description: A case study. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 47(7), 671-686.
Snow, K. (2015). An examination of the practical and ethical issues surrounding false memoirs in cataloging practice. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 53(8), 927-947.
Snow, K., & Shoemaker, B. (2020). Defining cataloging ethics: Practitioner perspectives. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 58(6), 533-546. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2020.1795767 |
|
第14週 |
5/23 |
BIBFRAME / Interoperability / Authority Control
導讀同學：嚴采綸、洪培洛、周示嚴
參考：
A brief introduction to BIBFRAME 2.0 by Kelley McGrath http://nwcentral.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/McGrath_Bibframe_OLA_2017.pdf
BIBFRAME （Bibliographic Framework） from Librarianship Studies and Information Technology https://www.librarianshipstudies.com/2017/12/bibframe.html
[本週閱讀資料]
Kim, M., Chen, M., Montgomery, D. (2021). Moving toward BIBFRAME and a linked data environment. In S. S. Hines (Ed.), Technical services in the 21st century (p. 131-154). Bingley, UK: Emerald Publishing. (Advances in Library Administration and Organization, 42, 131-154.)
Zeng, M. L. (2019). Interoperability. Knowledge Organization, 46(2), 122-146. Also available in ISKO Encyclopedia of Knowledge Organization, http://www.isko.org/cyclo/interoperability
Wiederhold, R. A., & Reeve, G. F. (2021). Authority control today: Principles, practices, and trends. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 59(2/3), 129-158. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2021.1881009
[延伸閱讀]
Cole, T. W., Han, M.-J., Weathers, W. F., & Joyner, E. (2013). Library MARC records into linked open data: Challenges and opportunities. Journal of Library Metadata, 13(2/3), 163-196.
Park, J.-R., Richards, L. L., & Brenza, A.(2019). Benefits and challenges of BIBFRAME. Library Hi Tech, 37 (3), 549-565.
Sanderson, R. (2015). Analysis of the BIBFRAME ontology for linked data best practices, https://docs.google.com/document/d/1dIy-FgQsH67Ay0T0O0ulhyRiKjpf_I0AVQ9v8FLmPNo/edit#heading=h.310o1a8282cm
Schreur, P. (2018). The evolution of BIBFRAME: From MARC surrogate to Web conformant data model. Paper presented at: IFLA WLIC 2018 – Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Retrieved from http://library.ifla.org/2202/1/141-schreur-en.pdf
Taniguchi, S. (2018). Mapping and merging of IFLA Library Reference Model and BIBFRAME 2.0. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 56(5/6), 427-454.
[Authority Control / Identity Management]
Armitage, A., Cuneo, M. J., Quintana, I., & Carlson Young, K. (2020). ISNI and traditional authority work. JLIS.it, 11(1), 151–163. Retrieved from https://www.jlis.it/article/view/12554/11378
Cannan, J. P., Frank, P., & Hawkins, L. (2019). LC/NACO authority file in the Library of Congress BIBFRAME Pilots. Journal of Library Metadata, 19 (1/2), 39-51.
Downey, M. (2019). Assessing author identifiers: Preparing for a linked data approach to name authority control in an institutional repository context. Journal of Library Metadata, 19 (1/2), 117-136.
Heng, G., Cole, T. W., Tian, T., & Han, M.-J. (2021). Rethinking authority reconciliation process. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, https://doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2021.1992554
Jin, Q., & Kudeki, D. (2019). Identity and access management for libraries. Technical Services Quarterly, 36 (1), 44-60.
Powell, J., Hoover, C., Gordon, A., & Mittrach, M. (2019), Bridging identity challenges: Why and how one library plugged ORCiD into their enterprise. Library Hi Tech, 37 (3), 625-639.
Zhu, L. (2019). The future of authority control: Issues and trends in the linked data environment. Journal of Library Metadata, 19(3/4), 215-238. |
|
第15週 |
5/30 |
Class presentation |
|
第16週 |
6/6 |
Class presentation |
|
第17週 |
6/13 |
繳交期末作業（中午12:00以前，請以紙本繳交）
[補充資料]
[Cataloging Professionals]
瀏覽ALCTS Cataloging Competencies Task Force (2017). Core Competencies for Cataloging and Metadata Professional Librarians. Retrieved from https://alair.ala.org/bitstream/handle/11213/7853/Core%20Competencies%20Cataloging%20Metadata%20Professional.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
Boydston, J. M. K., & Leysen, J. M. (2014). ARL cataloger librarian roles and responsibilities now and in the future. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 52 (2), 229-250.
Hsieh-Yee, I. (2008). Educating cataloging professionals in a changing information environment. Journal of Education for Library & Information Science, 49(2), 93-106.
Joudrey, D. N., & McGinnis, R. (2014). Graduate education for information organization, cataloging, and metadata. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 52 (5), 506-550.
Park, J., Tosaka, Y., Maszaros, S., & Lu, C. (2010). From metadata creation to metadata quality control: Continuing education needs among cataloging and metadata professionals. Journal of Education for Library & Information Science, 51(3), 158-176.
Park, J.-R., Lu, C., & Marion, L. (2009). Cataloging professionals in the digital environment: A content analysis of job descriptions. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(4), 844-857.
Smith-Yoshimura, K. (2020). Transitioning to the next generation of metadata. Dublin, OH: OCLC Research. https://www.oclc.org/content/dam/research/publications/2020/oclcresearch-transitioning-next-generation-metadata-a4.pdf
[Cataloging Research]
Clarke, R. I. (2018). Cataloging research by design: A taxonomic approach to understanding research questions in cataloging. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 56(8), 683-701.
Terrill, L. J. (2016). The state of cataloging research: An analysis of peer reviewed journal literature, 2010–2014. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 54 (8), 593-611.
[Personal Information Organization]
Oh, K. E. (2019). Personal information organization in everyday life: Modeling the process. Journal of Documentation, 75(3), 667-691.
Oh, K. E. (2021). Social aspects of personal information organization. Journal of Documentation, 77(2), 558-575.
[其他]
Ojennus, P., & Tennis, J. T. (2013). Modeling the aesthetic axis of information organization frameworks, part 1: Theoretical basis. Journal of Documentation, 69(6), 807-826.
Ojennus, P., & Tennis, J. T. (2013). Modeling the aesthetic axis of information organization frameworks, part 2: Case studies. Journal of Documentation, 69(6), 827-850.
McTavish, J. (2015). Everyday life classification practices and technologies. Journal of Documentation, 71(5), 957-975.
Graf, A. M. (2018). Facets of graffiti art and street art documentation online: A domain and content analysis. Unpublished dissertation, The University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee.
Leazer, G. H. (2021). Strong and weak universalism in bibliographic services. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 59(6), 597-617.
Strader, C. R. (2021). Cataloging to support information literacy: The IFLA Library Reference Model’s user tasks in the context of the Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 59(5), 442-476.
Šauperl, A. (2013). Four views of a novel: Characteristics of novels as described by publishers, librarians, literary theorists, and readers. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 51(6), 624–654. doi: 10.1080/01639374.2013.773953 |
|