• Like
  • Save
It Final Presentation
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

It Final Presentation

on

  • 419 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
419
Views on SlideShare
415
Embed Views
4

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

2 Embeds 4

http://eden.rutgers.edu 3
http://www.eden.rutgers.edu 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    It Final Presentation It Final Presentation Presentation Transcript

    • Social Cataloging in the Libraries
      Charlie Terng
      610:550:02
      December 03, 2009
    • Main Issue:
      Traditional classification system
      (controlled vocabulary)

      - vs -
      Social tagging
    • Terminology
      Controlled vocabulary
      An organized collection of words/phrases/names, structured to show the relationships between terms and concepts.
      Examples: LCSH, MeSH.
      Tags
      User-generated metadata used to describe the “aboutness” of an object.
    • Main differences
      Controlled vocab:
      Authoritative.
      Structured as a hierarchy.
      Ordered, systematic way to search for information.
      Tagging:
      Derived by the general public.
      Unstructured.
      More approachable, user-friendly way to search.
    • Issues with controlled vocabulary
      Hierarchy structure and specific terminology requires users to be knowledgeable or familiar in the subject area.
      Pre-determined listing takes user element out of it.
      “Look, but don't touch”. Non-interactive.
    • What tags can offer
      Cataloging system based on terms used by “regular people”.
      More intuitive way of searching.
      Free-flow path, no hierarchical structure.
      Current, up-to-date terms.
      Most importantly, more access points.
    • Example
    • Example
      Library of Congress Subject Headings
    • Example
      LibraryThing tags
    • So why not just use tags?
      Quality/relevance of tags may vary (i.e., “spagging”).
      Tag clouds, evaluation by librarians are possible solution.
      Issues with specificity (i.e., squirrel topics).
      Although, LT's new “Tagmash” seems to fix this.
      Controlled vocabulary better for total recall.
    • Which should OPACs use?
      Not “either or”, but an integration of both.
      Their strengths cover each other's weaknesses.
      Different situations call for different methods.
      They also work well together.
      It's all about increasing access points.
    • LTFL is on the job
      1,512 libraries served.
      37 in NJ:
      LOGIN (20 libraries)‏
      Atlantic County System (10 libraries)‏
      Mount Laurel
      East Brunswick Public
      Camden County College
      Highland Park Public
      Cranbury Public
    • LibraryThing perks
      I see dead people's books.
      Tagmash
      Reviews, recommendations, booklists, etc.
      Will I like this?
    • Questions, comments, etc.