Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Cataloging Visual Objects: Film, Photographs, Born Digital Images <ul><li>Standards for cataloging visual objects </li></u...
Cataloging Cultural Objects Darin Grodin, Kelly Calvo, and Allison Pratt LIS 653 Knowledge Organization  -  Fall 2008 - Pr...
Open Shelves Classification: Usability and   Comparisons Acknowledgements Leana McCarthy, Katie Hentges, P.J. Bordeaux, Na...
Personal Information Management Laura Baldwin, Meghan Sullivan, Dirk Wijnen What is it? Personal information management “r...
Back to the Future – Can Dewey Survive Alongside OpenShelf Classification? Acknowledgments (Arial, 40 points, bold) Thanks...
Library 2.0: Embracing the Needs of the User Natalie Brant, Cathy Gollub, Philip Sutton, Julie Seigel, Stephanie Wilson Bl...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Pratt Sils Knowledge Organization Fall 2008

1,003 views

Published on

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Pratt Sils Knowledge Organization Fall 2008

  1. 1. Cataloging Visual Objects: Film, Photographs, Born Digital Images <ul><li>Standards for cataloging visual objects </li></ul><ul><ul><li>MARC, AACRII, AMIM, LOC & more </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Challenges of cataloging visuals objects </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Delicacy of objects, lack of standardization, ignored formats </li></ul></ul>Charlie Achuff Hillary Matlin Lee Anne Tuason
  2. 2. Cataloging Cultural Objects Darin Grodin, Kelly Calvo, and Allison Pratt LIS 653 Knowledge Organization - Fall 2008 - Professor Cristina Pattuelli <ul><li>How well does CCO work? </li></ul><ul><li>CCO: </li></ul><ul><li>Was designed for collections </li></ul><ul><li>concentrating on art and </li></ul><ul><li>architecture </li></ul><ul><li>Has a limited use when cataloging </li></ul><ul><li>other objects because of required </li></ul><ul><li>fields </li></ul><ul><li>ContentDM: </li></ul><ul><li>No required fields and was </li></ul><ul><li>designed to be universal </li></ul><ul><li>Stores pictures and metadata and </li></ul><ul><li>works as an inventory and display </li></ul><ul><li>Epact: </li></ul><ul><li>Fields do not change from entry to </li></ul><ul><li>entry </li></ul><ul><li>Each entry includes pictures and </li></ul><ul><li>two levels of text </li></ul>The TOFT Collection -AMIM is a set of standards for cataloging moving images-the TOFT collection uses these in conjunction with the MARC format. -The TOFT collection contains original recordings of Broadway, Off-Broadway shows and other theater related materials. <ul><li>A manual for describing, documenting, and cataloging cultural works and their visual surrogates. </li></ul><ul><li>Covers art and architecture, including paintings, sculpture, prints, manuscripts, photographs, archaeological sites, artifacts & other cultural objects. </li></ul><ul><li>Designed for use by professionals in museum and visual resource collections, and archives and libraries that focus on art, architecture & material culture. </li></ul><ul><li>Developed to provide data content standards as a means of promoting good descriptive cataloging through consistency, data sharing, and increased user access. </li></ul>CCO: A Guide to Describing Cultural Works and Their Images
  3. 3. Open Shelves Classification: Usability and Comparisons Acknowledgements Leana McCarthy, Katie Hentges, P.J. Bordeaux, Natalie Miller. Grace Loiacono and Jessica Lyn Young LIS 653-Pratt Institute <ul><li>Findings: </li></ul><ul><li>“ OSC seems to be more centered on tagging rather than cataloging. More people will definitely understand that.” </li></ul><ul><li>” The idea is promising…as it’s customizable and provides much more freedom.” </li></ul><ul><li>“ LibraryThing doesn’t allow for much concentrated browsing if I’m not sure what I am looking for. With LoC, I can narrow my search within a specific subject heading, which I think is much easier to control and much more specific than the tag feature.” </li></ul><ul><li>“ I think there could definitely be some improvement in the categories. There seems to be areas, such as Medicine, where the categories the books would fit under are not necessarily right.” </li></ul><ul><li>“ LibraryThing is, on face, extremely user friendly, and I like that it’s very minimalist and unintimidating, however, …it could be very frustrating if the user needed to perform specific subject/key word searches or browse within a particular category. ” </li></ul>Conclusions: Library Professionals- while the idea of OSC is appealing there needs to be some improvements. It is still not up to par with existing systems. Librarians are excited because the potential is there for a more user friendly system. Non-Professionals-are extremely enthusiastic. They sometimes feel intimidated by LOC and Dewey. They want their local library to have a similar system to their local Barnes and Noble. Summary: Grace Loiacono and Jessica Lyn Young interviewed library professionals and non-professionals asking them the usability of OSC and comparing them to current established systems such as Dewey and the Library of Congress. Method: A series of phone, email and in-person interviews was conducted to assess the usability of OSC for library professionals and library patrons.
  4. 4. Personal Information Management Laura Baldwin, Meghan Sullivan, Dirk Wijnen What is it? Personal information management “refers to both the practice and the study of the activities people perform in order to acquire, organize, maintain, retrieve and use information…” What is Personal Information? -Info people keep for their own use -Info about someone kept by others “ Keeping [information] is a balancing act” (Marshall 67). Tools -E-Mail (Gmail, Outlook, etc) -Calendars -Contact Management <ul><li>Personal information becomes group information when it is shared: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>-photos (e.g. Flickr/Snapfish) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>-thoughts/opinions/plans (blogs/vlogs) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>-location (GPS mapping, e.g. iPhone)* </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>-schedule (calendar-sharing, e.g.)* </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>-interests/wants/wishes (gift registry, Amazon wish list, Netflix queue through “friend” features) </li></ul></ul>If there are tools to “remember” everything for us, are we free to forget it all? Conversely, are we free to forget anything, if there are tools to store it all indefinitely? Does storing personal information in a structured and recorded way make it more vulnerable?
  5. 5. Back to the Future – Can Dewey Survive Alongside OpenShelf Classification? Acknowledgments (Arial, 40 points, bold) Thanks to, Roy Hampton/Terry Smith, www.xkcd.com , www.librarything.com , www.coastal-sc.syrup.com , www.pratt.edu , and Frankfort Public Library Mary (Molly) Cronin & Laura O’Leary Dewey – It’s not dead yet! Dewey is everywhere. It’s the most popular classification system from coast to coast, across the oceans. So, why fix what isn’t broken? Mixing it Up Take some risks. Move away from the traditional realms of classification. Throw off the shackles of the 200’s and 300’s. Buck the constraints of the Library of Congress subject headings, but don’t throw it all out entirely. Use a mix to make it work.. Take the ideas of the patrons and mix them with the expertise of the staff. Figure 2. Image from www.xkcd.com , a fantastical map of the internet/social networking universe Figure 1. Mural of Melvil Dewey, by Roy Hampton and Terry Smith Key Image 1 Key Image 2 Figure 3. LibraryThing for Libraries, example via LibraryThing.com Key Image 3 Figure 4. Men “mixing it up” http://www.coastal-sc.com/syrup/ Key Image 4 Make it easy, make it fun, make it easy. Make the catalog easy to browse, make the books easy to find and your mission is accomplished. But it’s not that easy. Changing the mindset of patrons and staff is the biggest obstacle. Figure 5. Successful OpenShelf Classification at the Frankfort Public Library in Barrington, IL Key Image 5 You CAN have it all! An educated library staff, a motivated patron base and all the great new technologies will make a fully functioning OpenShelf Classification System a reality. Just don’t kill off Dewey. It’ll be hard to bring him back. References LibraryThing Adds Reviews to OPACs. (2008, November 15). Library Journal, Metadata Man. (Cover story). (2008, March 16). Library Journal . It’s what all the kids are into… In the age of RSS feeds, Facebook, instant gratification for information, is Dewey even relevant? Yes and no.
  6. 6. Library 2.0: Embracing the Needs of the User Natalie Brant, Cathy Gollub, Philip Sutton, Julie Seigel, Stephanie Wilson Blogs are an increasingly popular web tool. With the increase in popularity, libraries are slowly adapting this technology to disseminate information to their audience in a more immediate and informal way. In addition, librarians are using this technology to share ideas with other library professionals. Wikis A Wiki is a resource that allows a registered user to upload, edit, link, share, and discuss information on the Web, with little or no HTML or programming skills. It is a useful site for collaboration and knowledge organization, that may be designed to function according to specific user or community requirements, operating as an archive, listserv, encyclopedia, directory, gazetteer or website. A Wiki enables a library to interact with its users. Figure 2. Tag Cloud for Web 2.0 Figure 1. I write blogs, brainstuck.com . LIS 653 Key Image 2 Figure 3. http://evan.prodromou.name/images/wiki-concept-map.png. Figure 4. Social Bookmarking Key Image 4 Social Bookmarking in Libraries Figure 5. Open Source Software Trademark Key Image 5 Open Source Software (OSS) A Web 2.0 resource that is user centered free software that can be used to implement all other Web 2.0 tools in the library. Anyone can view and modify the source code therefore developing the Library 2.0 tools to fit the precise needs of that particular library. References Casey, Michael E. & Savastinuk, Laura C. (2006). Library 2.0: Service for the next-generation library. Library Journal. Chawner, P., & Lewis, P. (2006) WikiWikiWebs: New ways to communicate in a web environment. Retrieved December  4th, 2008,  from www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/lita/litaevents/  2004forum/CS_WikiWikiWebs.pdf Boast, R., Bravo., M., & Srinivasan, R. (2007). Return to babel: Emergent diversity, digital resources, and local knowledge. Information Society, vol. 23. Gibbons, S. (2007). The academic library and the net gen student: Making the connections . Chicago: American Library. Social Tagging Social tagging is an informal, post hoc system of classification which accepts an infinite number of possible and acceptable terms, reflecting the diverse backgrounds, terminologies, and needs of its users. Tagging is now being used by cultural institutions to promote their collections. Social bookmarking enables a user to organize and store web pages on the Internet and identify them through a system of user generated tagging. Allows for easy retrieval of bookmarks and for sharing and browsing of other users’ bookmarks. Public libraries, as well as academic libraries are experimenting with its use. Blogs

×
https://www.slideshare.net/PrattSILS/pratt-sils-knowledge-organization-fall-2008-1127780
www.slideshare.net
crawl=CC-MAIN-2019-04
143892
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:M2TV7XI4KUWVDAQW33AOI7CFV6BYKC7M
<urn:uuid:62eb6440-1198-4fe0-b51a-931814874f4a>
2019-01-20T11:06:49Z
108.174.10.19
text/html
sha1:NMUX3QH4TLDPVJOLCAOVQLA4ILJJQP2J
<urn:uuid:e29bb6e3-cd1e-4341-9bad-351b62ad8447>
https://www.slideshare.net/PrattSILS/pratt-sils-knowledge-organization-fall-2008-1127780
response
<urn:uuid:0979b76a-ff97-4679-bf3e-a96a36daaf17>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2019-04
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for January 2019
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-101-220-24.ec2.internal
software: Apache Nutch 1.15 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 0.11-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: http://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/