Archive for the ‘knowledge organization’ tag

DANS: A Catalyst for Knowledge Organization and Structure Research*   no comments

1.0 KO and KS Research: From the real world

Research is the formal, self-conscious process of inquiry for the discovery and production of knowledge and the subsequent explication of theory. Knowledge Organization (KO) is the “science of the conceptual order of knowledge” (Smiraglia 2014, 4) and Knowledge Structure (KS) is a research paradigm in which the structural tools of KO are applied to syntactic representations [of knowledge] that yield structural classes [for] multi-dimensional understanding” (Smiraglia 2020, 46). Thus, research—formal discovery for theory-building—in KO is devoted to unlocking the conceptual elements of that which is known, while, simultaneously, research in KS is devoted to revealing the underlying multi-dimensional fabric and anatomy of knowledge.

Discovery of concepts, their orders, and the subtrate implications of those orders must be rooted in real-world problems. This is why even so-called “theoretical” research (this is research that tests hypotheses in order to reject alternatives until a theory can emerge) must be rooted in milieus that present questions that need specific applications as answers.


Instantiation: The multidecade evolution of the theory of instantiation began with the problem of disambiguating clusters of catalog entries for musical works (think: Beethoven Symphony…. (Smiraglia 1989)) but has been demonstrated to have relevance in evolutionary biology (Greenberg 2009). A real world “problem” presents a question that has larger implications and on analysis leads to structural conclusions such as that the substrate of RDF triples that constitute the Semantic Web are themselves (as are all information objects) to the process of instantiation (realization in time) and therefore constitute classes that require disambiguation (Smiraglia 2008).

Nanoscale patterns in the outer skin layers of humans (Adams et al. 2023): Biologists studying the exoskelotal structure of roundworm nematodes who have transparent structures have discovered “pillars” that form a kind of “scaffolding,” forming not only an “intricate architecture” but “complex structures and intricate patterning.” Patterns, of course, indicate clusters, which can be described as classes, which will need, in turn, disambiguating. A very real-world biological structure presents also a substrate biological knowledge structure. (See: )

2.0 Catalysts for KO and KS Research

The science of knowledge organization owes its formalization to founder Ingetraut Dahlberg, who laid out a plan for independent institutes that would have as their sole objective the study of concepts and knowledge structures (Dahlberg 2007; 2008).

The Institute for Knowledge Organization and Structure, Inc. ( ) is the first institute developed with this sole task as its mission.

At least three major coordinated research environments have generated a fair amount of publication. These groups were all formed by prolific researchers in KO whose work was grounded in real-world applications and the construction of KO systems (KOSs). Ultimately, each of these groups has served as a catalyst for critical research in KO, and arguably in KS. The entire domain of KO, then, relies to some extent on the input of catalytical groups to constantly massage and ultimately deepen the granularity of the domain’s intension.

The oldest and most revered is the Sarada Ranganathan Endowment and the Department of Library & Information Science, University of Mysore, Mysore, India. The Ranganathan endowment produces annually a series of lectures on critical problems in knowledge organization and publishes the journal now titled Journal of Information and Knowledge.

The prolific Brazilian group GPFAPOI: Formação e atuação profissional em produção e organização da informação (Training and professional performance in production and organization of information) formed in 1995 by José Augusto Chaves Guimarães and Natália Bolfarini Tognoli at the Faculty of Philosophy and Sciences, Marília Campus of São Paulo State University Júlio de Mesquita Filho – UNESP ( ). The group has been influential in domain analysis, the ethics of knowledge organization (Martínez-Ávila et al. 2015), and archival applications of KO (Guimarães and Tognoli 2015), among a host of other topics.

Also notably prolific was the Knowledge Organization Research Group (KOrg) at the School of Information Studies of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. Originally formed in 2008, the group eventually hosted international conferences on ethics in KO, held annual retreats, invited guest fellows to join them on campus, and generated three anthologies: Cultural Frames of Knowledge (Smiraglia and Lee 2012), Ontology for Knowledge Organization (Smiraglia and Lee 2015), and Dimensions of Knowledge: Facets for Knowledge Organization (Smiraglia and Lee 2017)). Through interaction with the CIDOC-CRM Conceptual Reference Model for cultural heritage ontology ( ) and the Dutch Virtual Knowledge Studio (Daga, Scharnhorst and Smiraglia 2023, 137) project “Knowledge Lab,” the group served as a catalyst for nascent research in KS.

3.0 DANS

DANS (officially Data Archiving and Networked Services), is an institute of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (KNAW or Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen ) and of the Dutch Research Council (I or Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek ). DANS is described as the “Dutch national centre of expertise and repository for research data” ( ), supporting a wide bench of services for scholars to make their data available for research. At present there are data stations for social sciences and humanities, archaeology, life health and medical sciences, and physical and technical sciences. DANS also supports a Data Vault, a shared service called DataVerse, and a wide program of Data Expertise, which brings together researchers, data professionals and other archives to work for sustainable storage and sharing of research data.

DANS has for many years supported a group of honorary fellows, distinguished researchers from related sciences whose own work intersects with the goals of DANS. The present essay shows how DANS has been one of the most productive institutional catalysts for research in KO and KS.

3.1 The KOSo Observatory

The Knowledge Organization System Observatory, KOSo, was a project of DANS begun in 2017 to create a centralized directory to knowledge organization systems. The term “observatory” arose from conversations in the knowledge organization community over time. The goal was to create a repository from which researchers could interact with KOSs. The result of the project was a complex spreadsheet replete with live hyperlinks to extant systems in the social sciences, humanities, and life sciences. The results of the project are available in IKOS’ website: (Coen, Smiraglia, Doorn and Scharnhorst 2019).

3.2 The NARCIS Classification

NARCIS (National Academic Research and Collaborations Information System) was a DANS-maintained national research portal for Dutch scholars. An open access repository of publications and datasets was combined with texts of peer-reviewed publications. To facilitate research and retrieval a classification was created and named for NARCIS. The classification allowed symbolic representation of not only the contents of the portal but also of the Dutch national research milieu. As part of efforts to study the NARCIS Classification the methodology known as “comparative classification” was generated. In comparative classification, sets of ontical positions (essentially concept statements) are classified using two or more different KOSs to quantify aspects of each, such as granularity, expressivity, synthetic capability, etc.

In September 2018 DANS hosted a two-day colloquium ““Trajectories for Research: Fathoming the Promise of the NARCIS Classification,”” 27-28 September. The proceedings from this colloquium were published in a special issue of Knowledge Organization (v. 46, no. 5 2019). In addition to providing a forum for detailed discussion about the NARCIS classification, the colloquium also succeeded in bringing together diverse points of view about national research classifications.

3.3 Digging into the Knowledge Graph

Digging Into the Knowledge Graph (Di4kg ) was a project funded under the Trans-Atlantic Platform’s Round Four Digging Into Data Challenge. The purpose of the challenge was to explore sustainability of data-intensive projects. Di4kg was specifically designed to explore best practices for Linked Open Data (LOD) in KOSs in general, and in the social sciences and humanities in particular. Two use cases comprised the majority of work in the four-year project. The humanities project was the creation of LOD for the contents of the Renaissance polyphony CMME (Computerized Mensural Music Editing) project (, which was accomplished by IKOS using existing library LOD venues coordinated through the Virtual International Authority File (VIAF ). The social sciences project involved the UNSPSC United Nations Standard Products and Services Code classification ( ). The project concluded with the publication of an anthology Linking Knowledge: Linked Data for Knowledge Organization (Smiraglia and Scharnhorst 2021).

3.4 Visualization of topic clusters in bibliographic databases

Wang and Koopman (2019) also presented a conference paper and a more extensive journal article about their work with the Ariadne information retrieval tool developed experimentally to investigate topical clusters in the OCLC bibliographic database (Koopman, Wang and Scharnhorst 2015; 2017).

3.5 DANS Infrastructure as Knowledge Structure

Another collaboration featured the knowledge infrastructure represented by DANS, and in particular its role in mediating information exchange among stakeholders (Borgman, Scharnhorst and Golshan 2019).

3.6 KOSs for Digital Humanities

September 2023 saw a workshop at DANS: “Knowledge Organisation Systems: Digital humanities practices and archiving challenges. How much semantic interoperability is feasible?” Approximately simultaneously a poster was prepared for the first post-pandemic international conference of the Association for Information Science and Technology, London, October 2023 (Scharnhorst et al. 2023) The poster, like the workshop, brought together many research streams in which DANS participates, most notable in this case DARIAH (Digital Research Infrastructure for the Arts and Humanities .

4.0 Conclusion: Research Interactions and Alliances for Catalyzing KO and KS

Given that research is the rigorous pursuit of solutions through discovery and that research in KO and KS must be rooted in real-world problems. The maturation of KO as a science has been assisted by a set of very prolific catalyst research groups. DANS clearly has become one of these engines of discovery in KO and KS. Although the mission of DANS is not primarily that of a research institute, it is clear from the evidence compiled here that through the very real-world querying of applications problems in KO and KS DANS has taken a place of honor in the emergence of theoretical research as substrate for very real-world KOS applications. From the KOSo Observatory to the role of semantic interoperability, DANS has catalyzed streams of thought that point to the evolution of new paradigms for research in KO and KS.


Adams, Jennifer R. G., Murugesan Pooranachithra, Erin M. Jyo, Sherry Li Zheng, Alexandr Goncharov, Jennifer R. Crew, James M. Kramer, Yishi Jin, Andreas M. Ernst and Andrew D. Chisholm. 2023. “Nanoscale patterning of collagens in C. elegans apical extracellular matrix.” Nature Communications 14, article no. 7506. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-023-43058-9

Borgman, Christine L., Andrea Scharnhorst and Milena S. Golshan. 2019. “Digital Data Archives as Knowledge Infrastructures: Mediating Data Sharing and Reuse.” Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 70, no. 8: 888-904.

Coen, Gerard, Richard P. Smiraglia, Peter Doorn and Andrea Scharnhorst. 2019. “Observing trajectories of KOSs Across Space and Time: The DANS KOS Observatory (KOSo).” In Proceedings from North American Symposium on Knowledge Organization, Vol. 7. Drexel University. DOI:

Daga, Enrico, Andrea Scharnhorst and Richard Smiraglia. 2023. “Ordering the World, Ordering our Thinking, Ordering Interdisciplinary Collaboration—On Knowledge Organization and Ontology Engineering.” In Transferability: Reflections on Planning and Knowledge Organization, ed. H. A. Mieg and A. Scharnhorst. Wissenschaftsforschung Jarhbuch 2021. Berlin: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag, pp. 133-153.

Dahlberg, Ingetraut. 2007. “Interview with Ingetraut Dahlberg.” Knowledge Organization 35, no.2/3: 82-85.

Dahlberg, Ingetraut. 2008. “Concepts and Terms – ISKO’s Major Challenge.” Knowledge Organization 36, nos. 2/3: 169-177.

Greenberg, Jane. 2009. “Theoretical Considerations of Lifecycle Modeling: An Analysis of the Dryad Repository Demonstrating Automatic Metadata Propagation, Inheritance, and Value System Adoption.” Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 47, no. 3: 380-402. DOI: 10.1080/01639370902737547

Guimarães, José Augusto Chaves and Natália Bolfarini Tognoli. 2015. “Provenance as a Domain Analysis Approach in Archival Knowledge Organization.” Knowledge Organization 42, no. 8: 562-569. DOI:10.5771/0943-7444-2015-8-562

Koopman, Rob, Shenghui Wang and Andrea Scharnhorst. 2015. “Contextualization of Topics – Browsing through Terms, Authors, Journals and Cluster Allocations.” In Proceedings of ISSI 2015 Istanbul, 15th International Society of Scientometrics and Informetrics Conference, Istanbul, Turkey, 29 June to 3 July, 2015, ed. A. A. Salah, Y. Tonta, A. A. Akdag Salah, C.  Sugimoto and U. Al. Leuven: ISSI Society, pp. 1042-1053.

Koopman, Rob, Shenghui Wang and Andrea Scharnhorst. 2017. “Contextualization of Topics: Browsing Through the Universe of Bibliographic Information.” Scientometrics 111, no. 2: 1119-1139.

Martínez-Ávila, Daniel, José Augusto Chaves Guimarães, Fabio Assis Pinho, and Melodie J. Fox. 2015. “The Representation of Ethics and Knowledge Organization in the WoS and LISTA Databases.” Knowledge Organization 42, no. 5: 269-275. DOI:10.5771/0943-7444-2015-5-269

Scharnhorst, Andrea, Pascal Flohr, Vyacheslav Tykhonov, Jerry De Vries, Hella Hollander, Jetze Touber, Wim Hugo, Richard Smiraglia, Yann Le France, Ronald Siebes and Enno Meijers. 2023. “Knowledge Organisation Systems in the Humanities: Semantic Interoperability in Practice.” Poster. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology

Smiraglia, Richard P. 1989. “Music Uniform Titles: An Exercise in Collocating Works.” Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 9, no. 3 (1989): 97-114.

Smiraglia, Richard P. 2008. “A Meta‐analysis of Instantiation as a Phenomenon of Information Objects.” Culture del testo e del documento 9 n° 25: 5-25.

Smiraglia, Richard P. 2014. The Elements of Knowledge Organization. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.

Smiraglia, Richard P. 2020. “The Relationship between Knowledge Organization and Knowledge Structure.” IKOS Bulletin 2, no. 2: 46-49.

Smiraglia, Richard P. and Andrea Scharnhorst, eds. 2021. Linking Knowledge: Linked Open Data for Knowledge Organization and Visualization. Baden-Baden: Ergon Verlag.

Smiraglia, Richard P. and Hur-li Lee, eds. 2012. Cultural Frames of Knowledge. Würzburg: Ergon Verlag.

Smiraglia, Richard P. and Hur-li Lee, eds. 2015. Ontology for Knowledge Organization. Würzburg: Ergon-Verlag.

Smiraglia, Richard P. and Hur-li Lee, eds. 2017. Dimensions of Knowledge: Facets for Knowledge Organization. Würzburg: Ergon-Verlag.

*Excerpted from: Smiraglia, Richard P. 2023. “DANS: A Catalyst for Knowledge Organization and Structure Research.” IKOS Bulletin 5, no.2: 109-126. [57 references].

Written by admin on January 18th, 2024

Tagged with , , , ,

Seeing Knowledge, Seeing New Knowledge   no comments

Posted at 9:32 pm in Uncategorized

On 14 March, on the American television show 60 Minutes there was a story about COVID-19 mutants. Now, scientists understand mutations, so there was nothing surprising, scientifically, in the story. But the shock for me came when the scientist showed the journalist a large visualization of the data about mutations of the virus. Okay, maybe the journalist was just a bit lead-handed about the question; but the answer was completely unsatisfying for a scientist of information who has spent decades helping to visualize science.

The point of the chart, of course, was the visualization—the ability to “see” the mutations as they arise and spread.

Today the leading scientists of information with regard to visualization are Katy Börner of Indiana University (see her atlases of science [2010] and knowledge [2015]) and my colleague Andrea Scharnhorst (DANS [Data Archiving and Networked Services, Royal Netherlands Academy of the Arts and Sciences]) (see for example her team’s visualization of the whole of Wikipedia [Salah et al. 2011] ). Most recently we have been working to map the knowledge organization structures that exist hidden within the LOD Cloud (our book Linking Knowledge will appear later this year).

KO experts have used visualization as a key tool both for data analysis (e.g., co-word analysis or author co-citation analysis or network analysis) and for expressing abstract ideas (e.g., ontological maps or reference models such as the CIDOC cultural heritage Conceptual Reference Model or its sibling the IFLA Library Reference Model ).

Like the 60 minutes example:

whose map shows both the proximity of variants to the viruses from which they mutated and the distance among the distinct variants and the rate of mutation over time; showing all on the same map helps scientists visualize both the particulars and the full picture.

CBS News made it impossible to grab a real visual from their video so you will have to look for yourself—and warning, you cannot even pause the video to look at the visualization—but here is what I was able to capture:

We can see striations of different color, and along them we can see nodes that represent instantiations of the virus; the striations apparently represent mutations. We can see how the lines thicken and grow together over time as the virus and its mutations gain ground (and efficacy at transmission). This simple capture shows the importance of visualization. The knowledge of the degrees of mutation and of transmissibility is useful, but the visualization makes it all the more clear what sort of battle lies ahead for epidemiology, which is the science of controlling pandemics.

Research in knowledge organization is replete with visualizations. From my own work I can recommend three examples:

“Universes, Dimensions, Domains, Intensions and Extensions: Knowledge Organization for the 21st Century.” In A. Neelameghan and K.S. Raghavan eds. Categories, Contexts, and Relations in Knowledge Organization: Proceedings of the Twelfth International ISKO Conference, 6-9 August 2012, Mysore, India. Advances in Knowledge Organization 13. Würzburg: Ergon Verlag, 2012, 1-7.

“Prologomena to a New Order: A Domain-Analytical Review of the Influence of S.R. Ranganathan on Knowledge Organization.” In Sarada Ranganathan Endowment for Library Science, Bangalore Golden Jubliee. SRELS Journal of Information Management (2013): 709-19.

Smiraglia, Richard P. 2018. “The Evolution of the Concept: A Case Study from American Documentation.” Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science 42: 113-34.

Currently in IKOS (The Institute for Knowledge Organization and Structure, Inc. ) we are working on a study of home care nursing in the pandemic. To guide our research we continually analyze our data even as the data store grows, mirroring the work of the medical researchers in the 60 Minutes report above. For example, after a simple analysis of video transcripts of home care nurses being interviewed in the press we were able to return a visualization of frequently occurring themes.

This visualization helps us guide our further research by showing clear facets in the nurses’ experiences. We see especially the important core of PPE and the frequent mention of the “front lines” in the “home_care” facet. This gives us important clues to the emotional component of the profession of home care nursing at the moment. Stay tuned for publications from our work in the near future.

It is important that scientists of visualization in the KO community speak up and make their work known, preferably in popular venues, such as the Economist, so that the world will understand the role we play in solving the great riddles of science. KO is vital to science.


Börner, Katy. 2010. Atlas of Science: Visualizing What We Know. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.

Börner, Katy. 2015. Atlas of Knowledge: Anyone Can Map. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.

Salah, Alkim Almila Akdag, Cheng Gao, Andrea Scharnhorst, and Krzysztof Suchecki. 2011. Design vs. Emergence: Visualisation of Knowledge Orders. Courtesy of The Knowledge Space Lab, Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences. Places & Spaces: Mapping Science VII.5

Smiraglia, Richard P. 2012. “Universes, Dimensions, Domains, Intensions and Extensions: Knowledge Organization for the 21st Century.” In Categories, Contexts, and Relations in Knowledge Organization: Proceedings of the Twelfth International ISKO Conference, 6-9 August 2012, Mysore, India, ed. A. Neelameghan and K.S. Raghavan. Advances in Knowledge Organization 13. Würzburg: Ergon Verlag, 1-7.

Smiraglia, Richard P. 2013. “Prologomena to a New Order: A Domain-Analytical Review of the Influence of S.R. Ranganathan on Knowledge Organization.” In Sarada Ranganathan Endowment for Library Science, Bangalore Golden Jubliee. SRELS Journal of Information Management (2013): 709-19.

Smiraglia, Richard P. 2018. “The Evolution of the Concept: A Case Study from American Documentation.” Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science 42: 113-34.

Smiraglia, Richard P. and Andrea Scharnhorst, eds. 2021. Linking Knowledge: Linked Open Data for Knowledge Organization. Baden-Baden: Ergon Verlag. Forthcoming.

Written by lazykoblog on March 21st, 2021

Tagged with ,

Teaching epistemology   no comments

Posted at 6:04 pm in epistemology,teaching

For years students and colleagues rolled their eyes any time I said anything about epistemology. Once, famously, a paper submitted for a major international conference was accepted with revisions, one of which was to explain what that was because the readers (all holders of PhDs mind you) didn’t know what epistemology was, and (apparently) were unable to look it up or otherwise figure it out. Sigh.

But then epistemology became an important part of the science of knowledge organization, originating in papers by diverse scholars, leading to panels at international ISKO conferences and eventually even two anthologies (Smiraglia and Lee 2012; Ibekwe-SanJuan and Dousa 2014). Epistemology, how we know what we know, is one of the two major poles in a domain-centric knowledge organization.

So the question arises, how can we teach it without getting everybody dizzy from eye-rolling? I took a stab at it recently and I think it worked out nicely. In my introductory course in KO I often begin class discussions by asking the students to post an observation about some thing that has some order. This time around I got everything from a grandmother’s farmer’s market vegetable table to how big-box hardware stores hide microfiber cloths. I enjoy responding to each post, pointing out the nature of the organization–hierarchy for the vegetables, for example. It helps to point out to them that everything everywhere is organized in some manner, not just libraries.

This time I followed up with a secret epistemology discussion by asking them to post something they absolutely knew for sure. I gave them a couple of examples: “I know George Washington was president because it’s history I was taught; I never met the man. I know the speed limit on Lincoln Memorial Drive is 30 but I’d better drive 70 or people will plow into me or drive me into the lake. I know this because it happens to me daily. Of course, we have here examples of historicism and empiricism (okay, facetious empiricism, but if you live in Milwaukee you’ll get it). They did a great job. Here’s a table of a few of the things they came up with:

fastest routes to campusempirical
swimming must blow air out your noseempirical
Rush has 3 members …historical
death and taxeshistorical
difficult to buy a car with manual transmissionempirical
get out of the pool if there’s thunder and lightningpragmatic
yellow mustard eases pain of small burnsempirical
pick from the back when shoppingpragmatic


I think it turned out well, and although we didn’t go further into epistemology in this introductory course, it allowed me to reference this discussion at the end when they were exploring the heirarchies in DDC numbers assigned to specific resources, which subtly makes the point about the role of epistemic stances.


Ibekwe-SanJaun, Fidelia and Thomas M. Dousa, eds. 2014. Theories of Information, Communication and Knowledge: A Multidisciplinary Approach. Dordrecht: Springer-Netherlands.

Smiraglia, Richard P. and Hur-li Lee, eds. 2012. Cultural Frames of Knowledge. Würzburg: Ergon-Verlag.

Written by lazykoblog on July 10th, 2016

Tagged with , , ,

Domain analysis of KO   no comments

Posted at 5:56 pm in domain analysis,KO

I’ve been taking little bites of domain analysis of KO, working my way through conference proceedings, and as CFPs allow, taking other bites as well (the legacy of Two kinds of power was one, and north American pioneers was another). This year I presented what was supposed to be a meta-analysis at CAIS. Unfortunately, CAIS has got this new procedure whereby you don’t really write a paper, so, there’s no paper, sorry. Just an extended abstract.

Here’s the citation, and the abstract of the abstract:

“Domain Coherence within Knowledge Organization: People, Interacting Theoretically, Across Geopolitical and Cultural Boundaries.” In McKenzie, Pam, Catherine Johnson and Sarah Stevenson eds., Exploring Interactions of People, Places and Information, Proceedings of the 39th Annual CAIS/ACSI Conference, University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, N.B. Canada, June 2-4, 2011.

Domain analysis is the study of the evolution of discourse within research communities. Domain analytical studies of knowledge organization are here drawn together for meta-analysis to demonstrate coherence of theoretical poles within the domain. Despite geopolitical and cultural diversity, the domain shows theoretical coherence.

Here’s a colorful visualization of the intension and extension of the domain. It shows us coherence within the domain, despite geographical distinctions. There also a shift from emphasis on universal bibliographic classifications to increasing granularity as the Internet imposes new challenges, from 1993 onward.

Written by lazykoblog on June 19th, 2011

Tagged with , , ,

Hjorland’s Lifeboats (originally posted 1-5-2009)   no comments

Posted at 9:59 pm in epistemology

Birger Hjorland and his colleagues have created several lifeboats. You can find them here:

Here is a note from Dr. Hjorland (isko-l 9-03-2006):

The site is intented both to be my own working space, a source for my own students, and a source for everybody that might find it useful for their own research, teaching and practical work.
As you see it is overall very comprehensive and ambitious. It is not however finished, and it is not intended ever to be finished. It is intended to grow, to function as my own memory about bibliographical references, links, full-text sources, definitions, quotes and data that I encounter in my reading and scanning and which I believe I will need in the future (or might be helpful, in student projects etc).

Some parts of it will, however, be relative finished. When I prepare lectures, I place bibliographical references, definitions, quotes and data for the students and provide a list of the pages I am referring to in my teaching. This way, I hope to gradually build up a textbook, or some textbooks of an interactive nature.

If you consider when a single entry is dated you will observe, that many entries are updated very often. If a student ask a question, if i read something in a journal, if somebody discuss with me (or send a friendly or an angry message) I often update some entries. Of course this is a very demanding task, and I always need to do more work, that time allows me to do. So, please do not be angry because you feel something is missing, but suggest how you would like it changed.

Signed contributions from you are also welcome. The intention is to make a tool that might help bring us forward by working together. I believe such a tool is much needed.

Written by lazykoblog on November 17th, 2010

Tagged with , ,

NASKO domain analysis (originally posted 6-19-2009)   no comments

Posted at 9:37 pm in domain analysis

Greetings from rainy Syracuse. This is a small group (around 20 people at any given moment), but the program and the business meeting have both been fascinating. The 10 papers are all really pithy. Based around the concept of North American pioneers, the proceedings are here: As part of my paper developed using author co-citation analysis of North American KO authors I ran up a quick co-citation analysis from the 10 papers: there were two clusters–Smiraglia, Miksa, and Shera in one; Hjorland, Mai, Tennis, Olson, and Bates in the other–the conceptual basis of the clusters seems to be bibliographic classification and fundamentals of KO. The link between the clusters stretches from Shera to Hjorland (which I thought was fascinating). The cluster on faceting (La Barre, Cochrane, Richmond, Ranganathan) dropped off while I was trying to make the map readable; when I have more time I’ll run it again. Anyway, stay tuned ….

Written by lazykoblog on November 17th, 2010

Tagged with , ,