One down, more to go … but it’s reward time

Earlier today I gave my presentation of my paper in Ontologies. My presentation is entitled, “A Tale of Two Properties.” It is about using thesaural standards and practice to disambiguate the scope notes and examples of two CIDOC CRM properties (relationships).

It went pretty well.

After class, and the usual after-class discussion, I walked myself downtown to the Blind Pig for a reward. I enjoyed my 1st Guinness outdoors while I caught up with Bloglines and a lot of posts from CiL. I am now enjoying my 2nd pint sitting just inside the doors, but the doors are wide open. Which in the case of the Pig means basically the whole front “wall” is wide open.

I kind of wish I was at CiL as so many of my “diner friends” (see comment 3 & 4) are there, but I have a place I need to be right now. And that is school.

I now have a week to incorporate the additional material that I had in my presentation into my paper as my second paper. Shouldn’t be too difficult, except 1) I have another presentation to prepare for next Wednesday (and I have way too much stuff to choose from), and 2) Allen is talking about posting my paper to the CIDOC CRM discussion list.

I am happy with my efforts at disambiguating the P88 and P89 properties within CIDOC CRM for “geographical places,” but the entity (class) E53 Place is far broader than that, and FRBRoo (F12 Place) just makes it worse. I did take a 1st stab at giving examples for P88 and P89 in a FRBRoo world, but I’m unsure how far my analysis can be stretched. But the E53/F12 Place is already seriously over-stretched in the 1st place! Insanely overstretched! It definitely needs some subclasses.

My presentation for next week is for RO and is on “relationships.” Mostly those from the “bibliographic universe,” but I’ve read much wider than that. For instance, Green on relationships within the context of cognitive semantics.

After I give my presentation I have one more week to finish writing my book review (Bean & Green) and finish my annotated bibliography on my readings on relationships.

After class this evening I mentioned to Allen that I wish we had time to look at FRAD in Ontologies. He suggested that I suggest it for a discussion in Metadata Roundtable. Excellent idea, except I said I’d feel bad suggesting it but saying someone else needs to lead the discussion. He suggested a splitting up of the workload in a sort of team approach and even volunteered himself. Hmmm? Like I need more work! I still have to do my Terminology Services presentation, which may well end up being for this group.

But perhaps Allen, Kathryn, and I? Like Kathryn needs more work, too. But comments aren’t due until 15 July; maybe we have time to end the semester, me to “do” Terminology Services,” and for us to do this in MDRT, too. Hmmm? I’m crazy enough to try.

Some things read this week, 1 – 7 April 2007

Sunday, 1 Apr 2007

Paglia, Camille. Break, blow, burn. 2005. Read:

William Blake, “The Chimney Sweeper”
William Blake, “London”
William Wordsworth, “The World Is Too Much With Us”

Babik, Wieslaw. “Terminology as a level for the compatibility of indexing languages. Some remarks.” Compatibility and Integration of Order Systems: Research Seminar Proceedings of the TIP/ISKO Meeting, Warsaw, 13-15 September 1995. Warsaw: Indeks-Verlag, 1996. 157-162.

Aitchison, Jean. “A Classification as a source for a thesaurus: The Bibliographic Classification of H. E. Bliss as a source of thesaurus terms and structure.” Journal of Documentation 42 (3), Sep. 1986: 160-181.

This was a good article that looks at using BC2 to generate thesauri. It seems as if it could be a very useful tool; but what is the status of BC2 today? Was it completed? Has it been kept up-to-date? Need to look into that at some point….

Doerr, Martin and Patrick LeBoeuf. “Modelling intellectual processes: The FRBR-CRM Harmonization.” The CIDOC Conference, Gothenburg, Sweden, 2006 [pdf]

For Ontologies.

Monday, 2 Apr 2007

Paglia, Camille. Break, blow, burn. 2005. Read:

William Wordsworth, “Composed upon Westminster Bridge”

Broughton, Vanda. “Structural, linguistic and mathematical elements in indexing languages and search engines: Implications for the use of index languages in electronic and non-LIS environments.” Advances in Knowledge Organization, Vol. 7 (2000): Dynamism and stability in knowledge organization. Proceedings of the Sixth International ISKO Conference 10-13 July 2000, Toronto, Canada. Ergon Verlag: 206-212.

Farradane, J. “Relational indexing.” The Indexer: Journal of the Society of Indexers 2 (4)Autumn 1961

Wow! Über-classic article.

Monday – Tuesday, 2 – 3 Mar 2007

Doerr, Martin and Patrick Le Bouef. FRBR object-oriented definition (version 6.7) August 2006.

This is the version Allen linked to for Ontologies, but he and several others had the newest which is 7.1. That made me a little grumpy, to say the least. This is an attempt to harmonize FRBR with the CIDOC CRM.

These guys really are brilliant people, but this thing is a mess. If you had any squishy thoughts about FRBR at all, but particularly “works” or “manifestations,” be ready to have your brain pulled out through your rear end, kneaded until soft(er), pureed in a blender and put back in with a turkey baster up your nostrils. Seriously. A small part of that was trying to keep straight the newer model used in discussion from the one I had read, but mostly it was the several types of “manifestations” and, oh perhaps, a dozen kinds of “works.” Seriously guys, logic is not always your friend. I understand the logical purpose for the reification of multiple kinds of works, but is it useful?

I guess I truly need to see a bare-bones catalog and cataloging module that’s been designed with this model, play with it a bit, and then have a look at the innards. But I seriously cannot see anybody building something that will be used based on this. Maybe I’m just not the proper middle man here, but since that’s the role I see myself in in my professional life I consider that an issue. I really want to know how anyone will get from this model to a workable system that practitioners will buy in to.

Tuesday, 3 Apr 2007

Paglia, Camille. Break, blow, burn. 2005. Read:

Percy Bysshe Shelley, “Ozymandias”

Wednesday, 4 Apr 2007

Dousa, Thomas A. “Towards a clarification of the superwork in Svenonius’s set-theoretical model of the bibliographic universe.” Seminar paper for LIS590OH Spring 2007.

Good jeebus! Tom is a freaking genius! I need to re-read this—very closely—at least one more time. I’m not sure I see the same problem in Svenonius that Tom saw and solved. But, for now, I am assuming that he is right about the problem being there. Because as I said, Tom is a freaking genius! And if the problem is there. He solved it. And he used a few words that I’m going to have to look up, so that’s a bonus.

I’m just really sad that I’ll miss him presenting it next week. The week after I get to present my little paper on clarifying P88 and P89 in CIDOC CRM. I was so excited to find out Allen liked my paper! But now, after reading Tom’s, I feel so inadequate. Oh well, I’ve already warned several fellow students not to compare themselves to Tom. I best take my own advice for once.

Thursday, 5 Apr 2007

Albertsen, Ketil and Carol van Nuys. “Paradigma: FRBR and digital documents.” Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 39 (3/4), 2005: 125-149.

This is from the special issue of CCQ edited by Patrick Le Boeuf, Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR): Hype or Cure-all? Well worth checking out if you are new to FRBR.

This paper is about some FRBR Group 1 extensions implemented by the National Library of Norway for handling composite entities at all abstraction levels. I may have read it before as I read most of this issue, but it was cited by Tom in his paper.

Perreault, Jean. (1965) “Categories and relators: a new schema.” Reprinted in: Knowledge Organization 21 (4), 1994: 189-197.

Another Über-classic article.

Friday, 6 Apr 2007

Efthimiadis, Efthimis N. (1996) “Query expansion.” ARIST 31

Read to get some idea about the topic of query expansion and so I can say something about the role of relationships in this portion of search for my Representation and Organization project.

Buckland, Michael K., et. al. Advances in Knowledge Organization, Vol. 7 (2000): Dynamism and stability in knowledge organization. Proceedings of the Sixth International ISKO Conference 10-13 July 2000, Toronto, Canada. Ergon Verlag: 48-53.

Interesting report of some preliminary work I need to look into. Functional relationships may well be more important, or at least as important, as semantic relationships in providing access to organized knowledge/information.

Saturday, 7 Apr 2007

Vickery, Brian C. “Knowledge representation: A brief review.” The Journal of Documentation 42 (3), Sep. 1986: 145-149.

A decent early overview of ways of representing knowledge, particularly for use in computer systems.

Another semester shaping up

As we head into the second week of the semester, here is how things are looking:

LIS590OH: Ontologies in the Humanities with Allen Renear

First class consisted of introductions, discussing the proto-syllabus [first time offering], and where we might want to take the class. There are about 10 students almost evenly split between “old-timers,” like me, and some of the more interesting seeming newer students. I am very glad to see some 2nd semester Masters students in here and I look forward to learning from them, and from my “old-timey” friends, too, of course.

Coursework looks fairly easy but then, as this is an “intermediate research seminar” in Allen’s ontology of course types, the true work is in individual and group learning. We will also learn a bit about the ontology editor, Protégé, and have the opportunity to substitute a practical ontology project for one of our papers.

I’ve managed to get all of the discussion readings and background readings read for this week. While I may not always get the background readings done, especially when I have read them before as in this week, I was happy to revisit some of them. Actually, in truth, I skipped one discussion reading. Gasp! As good as it may be, how often can one re-read Barbara Tillett’s pamphlet, “What is FRBR?: A Conceptual Model for the Bibliographic Universe”? [pdf]

I did enjoy revisiting the 1st 3 chapters of the FRBR Final Report [pdf], Buckland’s “What is a Document?”, the 1st 2 chapters of Smiraglia’s The Nature of “a Work”, and Denton’s FRBR and Fundamental Cataloguing Rules. There were also 2 Renear co-authored papers, one on axiomatizing FRBR and one on refining the OHCO model of text.

The next couple of weeks will allow me to revisit chapter 3 of Svenonius’ The Intellectual Foundation of Information Organization [set-theoretic view of bibliographic entities] and some classic articles by Frege and Popper.

I’m not sure where my interests will take me in this class, but I am excited nonetheless.

LIS590RO: Representation and Organization of Information Resources with Kathryn LaBarre

This will actually be week 1 as we did not have class last week with Kathryn at ALISE. This seminar also has about 10 students, although most are either “mid-career” or newer students. But again, it looks like a brilliant group and I look forward to much interesting learning as we all explore our own varied interests within the structure of the class. About half of us are together in Allen’s class above, too, which may provide its own interesting angles and benefits.

Our “textbook” is Morville’s Ambient Findability, which in my experience wasn’t all that findable. The other, optional, text is Svenonius. Thankfully! [see above for Svenonius link.]

I read Morville over break and while it eventually got (a bit) better than I expected, it is still tripe. I have refrained from slagging it here so far since I will have the privilege of critiquing it in class. If, like me, you prefer to buy books, do yourself a favor and get this one at the library or at least used. Of course, if like me, you have an overpowering urge to write “BS!” in the margin of the first few pages then maybe you should buy a used copy. This has got to be the 1st book that I have ever written a negative comment in the preface! Seriously, who writes something that can be argued with in the preface?

Despite Morville, I am really looking forward to this class. And I do know what my focus will be. Relationships. Hopefully I will be able to mostly focus on thesaural relationships, but I intend to dive head first down this particular rabbit hole.

One of our assignments is a book review and a presentation of it in class. The book I am “reviewing” or, in my case, living with, is Bean and Green’s Relationships in the Organization of Knowledge. I found this book while working on my thesaurus paper a few weeks ago. I was unable to use it at the time and am glad that I get to now. I ordered myself a copy through abebooks on Friday evening.

Side note: I understand supply and demand (somewhat), and I understand that most of these sorts of books go to libraries, but seriously folks, why does a remaindered copy of such a book go for almost $90? I know I would buy a lot more of these seriously nerdy books if they were affordable! Richard and I were discussing this after 590ON last week regarding Smiraglia [see above]. The cheapest copy is over $100 used. Seriously, WTF?

Back to 590RO. I’m not sure what form my final project will take, but it will almost certainly involve relationships.

LIS592: Independent Study with Kathryn LaBarre

With Kathryn away until Wednesday, I am still in the process of getting this set up, although we have been narrowing it down via email. Here is the current draft of my proposal:

This independent study will allow me to further my research into thesauri. To this point, I have taken Thesaurus Construction (590TC), and have written a selective literature review on the mapping of thesauri as an aid to assist interdisciplinary scientists for Information Transfer & Collaboration in Science (590TR). I also have a graduate assistantship at the Illinois Fire Service Institute Library where I am responsible for maintaining the FireTalk thesaurus. My previous coursework has really piqued my interests in thesauri–construction, maintenance, evaluation, use, and current and future trends. My work experience has only reinforced how vastly difficult it is to implement theory.

My coursework for this independent study will involve reading (or re-reading) the ANSI/NISO Z39.19-2005 monolingual thesaurus, the ISO monolingual and multilingual thesaurus standards, Lancaster (1983), Aitchison, et. al. (2000), among other readings. It will also involve an in-depth look into both OCLC‘s and JISC‘s Terminology Services programs and research. I intend to visit OCLC Research over Spring Break for a first-hand look at their Terminology Services research.

I am particularly interested in current trends and future directions for embedding thesauri into various, diverse services (Terminology Services) and the extension of relationships in thesauri (see e.g., Green (1995), Tudhope, et. al. (2001).

I will meet with my instructor every other week to keep her abreast of my progress and for discussion of issues as needed.

The final product will take two forms: (1) A literature review of current projects and research into Terminology Services; and (2) a presentation on the reality and potential of Terminology Services. The presentation would be open to the school and any other interested parties.

Besides the extracurricular learning in linguistics and grammar that I need to do to provide myself a ladder back out of the rabbit hole of relationships, I think that is it. 🙂 For now.

Best of luck and learning this semester to all the LIS students out there. May you find what you’re looking for. And don’t forget to dive head first down a rabbit hole once in a while.