Comments on: Some things read this week, 5 -11 August 2007

By: Some things read this week, 2 - 8 September 2007

Some things read this week, 2 - 8 September 2007 — Sun, 09 Sep 2007 15:09:52 +0000

[...] Bates, Marcia J. “Information and knowledge: an evolutionary framework for information science.” Information Research 10 (4), July 2005. This is one of the Bates’ articles that Hjørland was responding to in “Information: Objective or Subjective/Situational?” [see below and previous post] [...]

By: Information; the idea

Information; the idea — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 23:39:20 +0000

[...] which is a critique of a concept of information put forth recently by Marcia Bates, in my “Some things read this week, 5 – 11 August 2007” [...]

By: Mark

Mark — Mon, 03 Sep 2007 02:23:26 +0000

Hi Sir and welcome. Thank you for your kind comments.

I will do my best to formulate a decently worded response to your paper (actually, the small area of my concern) and send it in as a letter to the editor. Thank you for the suggestion.

I must say that I have been excited about your forthcoming visit to UIUC, but now I especially am. Looking forward to meeting you this fall. Perhaps if you are at ASIS&T in Milwaukee I will see you there, too.

By: Some things read this week, 26 August - 1 September 2007

Some things read this week, 26 August - 1 September 2007 — Sun, 02 Sep 2007 17:05:11 +0000

[...] also my comments on this and related ideas on my “Some things read this week” post of 5-11 August 2007. I also seem to have conflicting ideas on whether narrowing the scope of information science is [...]

By: Birger Hjorland

Birger Hjorland — Sat, 01 Sep 2007 14:06:23 +0000

Hi Mark,
your analysis of mine and other researchers’ work demonstrate that you have a sharp mind. I propose that you publish your critique of my view of information as a letter to the editor in JASIST. I might then bring a rejoinder.

I have not yet finished my thoughts about your criticism. It is clear that information often raises new questions, but is that in contradiction to say that it has also answered some questions?

Remember that I wrote that the informativeness of any thing (or statement) is always hypothetical. One person may find a statement informative, but other may provide evidence that this was mistaken: Any claim that something is information may turn out to be wrong!

I do hope you will continue your imporant analysis and comments of important stuff in our field.

Best regards

Birger

By: Some things read this week, 12 -18 August 2007

Some things read this week, 12 -18 August 2007 — Sun, 19 Aug 2007 01:45:02 +0000

[...] it is, or could be, after-the-fact. I feel that it should be, primarily, after-the-fact, that is, the sort of post hoc conditionals that I was complaining about last [...]

By: Mark

Mark — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 23:03:18 +0000

Ah, yes, Laura. I got that a lot, too, re my philosophy degree. Most usually the inquirer was a business major.

I never could quite get one of them to explain to me just what this “business” was that they were going in to.

By: Laura

Laura — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 17:48:24 +0000

Your comments on usefulness remind me of all the times that I was asked what I would *use* my degree for when I was studying ancient Greek in college. “But whatever will you do with that?” “I plan to enjoy it,” is what I usually replied.

By: Mark

Mark — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 20:09:47 +0000

I guess I should have used the definite article, “The IDQ,” but I was just being lazy and cryptic. I started to use David and then decided I would use a variation of the name you have adopted. I guess I should know better seeing as how I’m reading your book with 3 titles.

I was primarily referring to reading your review, although I am attempting to get my hands on the book, too. And I doubt the Semantic Web is going to be of much help to us….

By: The Improbable Don Quijote

The Improbable Don Quijote — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 19:54:56 +0000

Sorry Mark, I don’t know what IDQ means. The definition I found on the Internet is: International Dairy Queen. Now, my wife says I make mongolian milk tea just like her grandmother did, but I am not a queen, so I am not sure how to interpret your “I would love to”: are you referring to reading Harris and Hutton, or my review? How does “IDQ” qualify what precedes it, if in fact it does? Perhaps the Semantic Web would improve our communication?