S503 - Representation and Organization

The representation and organization of information resources is a primary focus of the information profession. Organizational and representational structures such as classification schemes, indexes, and catalogs have been devised to provide access to information. The recent explosive growth in both the number and variety of information resources underscores the continuing need for application of effective methods of representation and organization.

Practical and effective information systems depend upon a comprehensive understanding not only of formal systems of organization and representation but also of human cognition itself. Accordingly, this course will investigate the basic principles and theoretical foundations of traditional representational and organizational schemes and review research in information science, cognitive science, semiotics, and computer science -- research that has contributed to an understanding of how people obtain, store, retrieve and use information. It will examine how this research can inform current practices of representation and organization in the design of more effective and more efficient information retrieval systems.

Each class session will include lecture, discussion and/or in-class activities focusing on the topic and required readings identified in the syllabus. Students may be asked to work in small groups and to report on the results of small-group discussions. Students are encouraged to participate actively in all lectures and discussions since participation in class activities and discussions will constitute 10% of each student's final grade.

Required readings have been selected to facilitate student participation in class discussions and in-class group activities. The Schedule of Lectures and Required Readings lists session topics and required readings (pp. 5-8); the Schedule of Recommended Readings (pp. 9-14) lists additional readings for each session topic. Assigned readings are subject to amendment by the instructor. Most of the required and recommended readings will be available online, either on the Web or through electronic reserves. Copies of required and recommended readings that are not available on electronic reserve will be available in hard copy format in the Kent Cooper Room. The url for electronic reserves is:

The password necessary to access the list of readings will be provided in class.

Grading

Each student's final course grade will be computed on the basis of grades earned for warm-up questions, the final exam and class participation. Satisfactory fulfillment of the minimum course requirements as outlined in the syllabus is considered "Good work" and will constitute a grade of B (see "Grading Scale", p. 4). Grades of A for work demonstrating "Outstanding achievement" or A- for "Excellent achievement" indicate "thorough knowledge of the course materials" and will be assigned only when the intellectual quality of a student's work surpasses expectations reflected in the minimum course requirements.

Warm-up questions are intended to assess student comprehension of the materials addressed in the readings; to provide an opportunity to apply the principles covered in class discussions; and/or to encourage the integration of conceptual material and practical experience.

Responses to warm-up questions will constitute 60% of the student's final course grade. Each response will be assigned a numerical grade on a scale of 0 to 5:

5 = excellent response demonstrating complete understanding and original thought

Warm-up questions will be posted on Oncourse on the Saturday preceding class. Responses are to be submitted via Oncourse no later than 9:00 pm on the Monday preceding class. Late submissions will be reviewed and a maximum grade of 4 assigned *if* they are submitted before 9:00 am on the day of class. Submissions submitted after 9:00 am on the day of class will not be graded.

There will be a total of thirteen (13) warm-up questions, each associated with the topic of the class session for which it is posted. Warm-up questions will not be posted for Sessions 1 and 15. In computing the final grade, the student's lowest score will be "thrown out" and only the remaining twelve (12) warm-up questions will be used.

The final exam will constitute 30% of the student's final course grade. It will be a take-home exam consisting of not more than six (6) questions. The exam will be posted on Oncourse on 3 December 2007. Questions about the exam will be answered in class on 4 December 2007. Completed exams will be submitted in hard copy format no later than 5:00 pm on 10 December 2007.

Assigned readings, class discussions and small group activities are intended to create a learning community and to promote critical literacy skills among all students -- skills of reading, writing, listening, speaking and thinking. It is important for all students to actively participate in class discussions and in-class activities since the success of these activities requires substantive and meaningful contributions from all students.

Class participation will constitute 10% of the student's final grade and will reflect a student's participation in discussions and activities based on the following criteria:

3. ability to tie observations to the ideas developed in the readings, to the contributions of other discussants and/or to ideas presented in other classes;

Late Submissions

Responses to warm-up questions must be submitted by 9:00 pm on the day before the class session for which they are assigned. Late submissions will be graded as described (see Warm-up Questions, above) if they are submitted before 9:00 am on the day of class. Submissions submitted after 9:00 am on the day of class will not be accepted.

In fairness to students who turn in assignments on time, late papers other than warm-up questions will be penalized by lowering the earned grade one level for each day that the paper is late. For example, a final exam with an earned grade of A- will receive a grade of B+ if it is one day late, a grade of B if it is two days late, etc.

Incompletes

Each student is expected to complete all coursework by the end of the term. A grade of incomplete [ I ] will be assigned only when exceptional circumstances warrant.

As Dr. Alice Robbin observes in her Fall 2006 syllabus for SLIS L509, there is more to avoiding plagiarism than simply citing a reference. Dr. Robbin points out that, in order to aid students both in recognizing plagiarism and in avoiding the appearance of plagiarism, Indiana University's Writing Tutorial Services has prepared a short guide entitled "Plagiarism: what it is and how to recognize and avoid it". This guide is available at:

The guide provides explicit examples of plagiarism and offers strategies for avoiding it. Each student should be familiar with this document and use it as a guide when completing assignments.

Dr. Robbin also offers tips on avoiding inadvertent plagiarism that she gleaned from Ralph Brower, a colleague at Florida State University:

Policies on academic dishonesty have been established by Indiana University and the School of Library and Information Science. These policies, which have been set out in the Code of Student Ethics, will be adhered to in this class. Any assignment that contains plagiarized material or indicates any other form of academic dishonesty will receive, at a minimum, a grade of F. A second instance will result in an automatic grade of F for the course. Penalties may be harsher depending on the severity of the offense.

If you are a student with a special need, please feel free to discuss it with the instructor.

Grading Scale

All grades will be assigned according to the SLIS Grading Policy for Master's and Specialist Level Students. This policy was defined by student and faculty members of SLIS's Curriculum Steering Committee and was adopted by the Faculty of the School of Library and Information Science, Indiana University, on November 11, 1996, as an aid in evaluation of student performance:

NOTE: For each class session, the following schedule includes a topic statement and a list of required readings. Required readings are listed in the order in which they should be read..

Jacob, E.K., & Albrechtsen, H. (1999). When essence becomes function: post-structuralist implications for an ecological theory of organisational classification systems. In T.D. Wilson & D.K. Allen (Eds.), Exploring the contexts of information behaviour. Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Research in Information Needs, Seeking and Use in Different Contexts, 13-15 August 1998, Sheffield, UK (pp. 519-534). London: Taylor Graham.

Barsalou, L. W. (1992). Representation. In Cognitive Psychology: an overview for cognitive scientists (p. 52-56 only). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Peat, F. D. (1993). Science as story. In C. Simpkinson and A. Simpkinson (Eds.), Sacred stories (p. 53-62). San Francisco: Harper.

National Information Standards Organization. (1996). Guidelines for abstracts. ANSI/NISO Z39.14-1997. American National Standards Institute. Available at: http://www.niso.org/standards/resources/Z39-14.pdf

Case, D. O. (2002). The concept of information. In Looking for information: a survey of research on information seeking, needs and behavior (pp. 40-63). Amsterdam: Academic Press.

Buckland, M. (1991). Information as thing. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42, 351-360. Available at: http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/~buckland/thing.html

Reddy, M.J. (1979). The conduit metaphor -- a case of frame conflict in our language about language. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (p. 284-297 only). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphorical systematicity: highlighting and hiding. In Metaphors we live by (pp. 10-13). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Shedroff, N. (2001). An overview of understanding. In R.S. Wurman, Information anxiety 2 (pp. 27-29). Indianapolis, IN: Que

Engelbart, D. C. (1963). A conceptual framework for the augmentation of man's intellect. In P. W. Howerton (Ed.), Vistas in information handling (p. 1-29). Washington, D.C.: Spartan Books. Republished (1998) in Irene Greif (Ed.), Computer supported cooperative work: a book of readings (pp 35-65), San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann. Also republished (1992) in T. Nishigaki (Ed.), Organization and groupware, NTT Publishing.

Clark, A. (1998). Magic words: how language augments human computation. In P. Carruthers & J. Boucher (Eds), Language and thought: interdisciplinary themes (pp. 162-183). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Available at: http://www.philosophy.ed.ac.uk/staff/clark/pubs/magic.pdf

Norman, D. A. (1983). Some observations on mental models. In D. Gentner and A. L. Stevens (Eds.), Mental models (p. 7-14). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Rumelhart, D. E. (1984). Schemata and the cognitive system. In Wyer and Srull (Eds.), Handbook of social cognition, vol. 1 (p. 161-188). Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Schank, R., and Kass, A. (1988). Knowledge representation in people and machines. In U. Eco, M. Santambrogio and P. Violi (Eds.), Meaning and mental representation (p. 181-200). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Wurman, R. S. (1989). The understanding business. In Information anxiety: what to do when information doesn't tell you what you need to know (p. 51-82). New York: Doubleday. 1989.

Zerubavel, E. (1991). Islands of meaning (p. 5-20). The great divide (p. 21-32). In The fine line: making distinctions in everyday life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Fabris, P. (1999). You think tomaytoes, I think tomahtoes. CIO WebBusiness (August 1, 1999). Available at: http://www.cio.com/archive/webbusiness/040199_nort_content.html

Hammond, T.H. (1993). Toward a general theory of hierarchy: books, bureaucrats, basketball tournaments and the administrative structure of the nation-state. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 3(1), 120-145.

Jacob, E. K. (1991). Classification and categorization: drawing the line. In B. H. Kwasnik and R. Fidel (Eds.), Advances in classification research, vol. 2 (p. 67-83). Washington D.C.: American Society for Information Science.

Buckland, M. (1999) Vocabulary as a central concept in library and information science. In T. Arpanac et al. (Eds.), Digital libraries: interdisciplinary concepts, challenges, and opportunities. Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Conceptions of Library and Information Science [CoLIS3] 23-26 May 1999, Dubrovnik, Croatia (p 3-12). Zagreb: Lokve. Available at: http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/~buckland/colisvoc.htm

Wellisch, H.H. (1995). Indexing languages: natural and controlled (p. 214-217). Indexing from A to Z, 2nd ed. New York: H.W. Wilson.

Olson, H. (1994). Universal models: a history of the organization of knowledge. In H. Albrechtsen and S. Oernager (Eds.), Knowledge organization and quality management: Advances in knowledge organization, vol. 4 (p. 72-80). Frankfurt/Main: Indeks Verlag.

Shera, J. H. (1965/1957). Pattern, structure, and conceptualization in classification for information retrieval. In Libraries and the organization of knowledge (p. 112-128). Hamden, CT: Archon.

Hunter, E. J. (2002). Classification made simple, 2nd ed. (pp. 40-58, 70-81, 86-88). Aldershot: Ashgate.

Bliss, H. E. (1934). The problem of classification for libraries (p. 1-20). The principles of classification for libraries (p. 21-46). In The organization of knowledge in libraries and the subject approach to books . New York: H. W. Wilson.

Dewey, M. (1972/1927). Decimal classification and relativ [sic] index. In A. F. Painter (Ed.), Reader in classification and descriptive cataloging (p. 81-86). NCR Microcard Editions.

Vickery, B. C. (1966). Introduction to faceted classification (pp. 9-18). Faceted classification schemes. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers School of Library Service.

Hunter, E. J. (2002). Classification made simple, 2nd ed. (pp. 4-39, 59-69, 82-85). Aldershot: Ashgate.

Music Library Association. Working Group on Faceted Access to Music. (1994). Discussion paper: Faceted access to music: possibilities and ramifications. Available at: http://www.music.indiana.edu/tech_s/mla/wgfam.dis

Jacob, E.K., & Priss, U. (In press). Non-traditional indexing structures for the management of electronic resources. In H. Albrechtsen and J.-E. Mai (Eds.), Advances in classification research, vol. 10. Medford, NJ: Information Today for the American Society for Information Science.

Foskett, A.C. (1996). Chapter 8: Alphabetical subject headings: Cutter to Austin (pp. 123-146). Chapter 23: Library of Congress Subject Headings (pp. 336-347). The subject approach to information, 5th ed. London: Library Association Publishing.

Drabenstott, K.M., Simcox, S., & Fenton, E.G. (1999). End-user understandings of subject headings in library catalogs. Library Resources & Technical Services 43(3), 140-160.

Batty, D. (1998). WWW -- Wealth, Weariness or Waste: Controlled vocabulary and thesauri in support of online information access. D-Lib Magazine, 4(November 1998). Available at: http://webdoc.sub.gwdg.de/edoc/aw/d-lib/dlib/november98/11batty.html

Aitchison, J., Gilchrist, A., & Bawden, D. (1997). Planning and design of thesauri (pp. 5-12). Structure and relationships (pp. 47-80). In Thesaurus construction: a practical manual, 3rd ed. London: Aslib.

Spiteri, L.F. (1999). The essential elements of faceted thesauri. Cataloguing and Classification Quarterly 28(4), 31-47.

Levy, D. M. (1995). Cataloguing in the digital order: Available at: http://csdl.tamu.edu/DL95/papers/levy/levy.html

Milstead, J., & Feldman, S. (1999). Metadata: cataloging by any other name . Online (January 1999). Available [with following article] at: http://www.cbuc.es/5digital/1.pdf

National Information Standards Organization. (2004). Understanding metadata. Available at: http://www.niso.org/standards/resources/UnderstandingMetadata.pdf

Greenberg, J. (2005). Understanding metadata and metadata schemes. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 40(3/4), 17-36.

Peterson, E. (2006). Beneath the metadata: some philosophical problems with folksonomy. D-Lib Magazine, 12(11). Available at: http://www.dlib.org/dlib/november06/peterson/11peterson.html

Vander Wal, T. (2007). Folksonomy coinage and definition. vanderwal.net. Available at: http://vanderwal.net/folksonomy.html

Quintarelli, E. (2005). Folksonomies: power to the peolpe. Available at: http://www.iskoi.org/doc/folksonomies.htm

Mathes, A. (2004). Folksonomies: cooperative classification and communication through shared metadata. Available at: http://www.adammathes.com/academic/computer-mediated-communication/folksonomies.html

Golder, S. A. & Huberman, B. A. (2006). Usage patterns of collaborative tagging systems. Journal of Information Science, 32(2). 198-208.

Jacob, E. K. (2003). Ontologies and the Semantic Web. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 29(4), 19-22.

McGuinness, Deborah L. (2003). Ontologies come of age. In D. Fensel et al. (Eds.), Spinning the semantic web: bringing the world wide web to its ull potential. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Shirky, C. (2005). Ontology is overrated: categories, links, and tags. Clay Shirky's Writings About the Internet: Economics & Culture, Media & Community. Available at: http://www.shirky.com/writings/ontology_overrated.html

Gruber, T. (2005). Ontology of folksonomy: a mash-up of apples and oranges. Republished in 2007 in International Journal on Semantic Web & Information Systems, 3(2). Available at: http://tomgruber.org/writing/ontology-of-folksonomy.htm

Berinstein, P. (1999). The big picture - Do you see what I see? Image indexing principles for the rest of us. Online 23(2), 85-86, 88.

Layne, S. S. (1994). Some issues in the indexing of images. Journal of the American Society for Information Society, 45(8), 583-588.

Krause, M. G. (1988). Intellectual problems of indexing picture collections. Audiovisual Librarian, 14, 73-81.

Recommended readings are organized by session and topic according to the Schedule of Lectures and Readings. Within each topic, recommended readings are ordered alphabetically and may be read in any order at any point across the semester.

Borko, H., & Bernier, C. L. (1975). Characteristics and types of abstracts. In Abstracting concepts and methods (p. 3-24). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Lancaster, F. W. (1998). Abstracts: types and functions (p. 94-106). Writing the abstract (p. 107-126). In Indexing and abstracting in theory and practice, 2nd ed. . Champaign, IL: Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois.

Agre, P.E. (1995). Institutional circuitry: thinking about the forms and uses of information. Information technology and libraries, 14(4). 225-230. Available at: http://dlis.gseis.ucla.edu/people/pagre/circuitry.html

Buckland, M. (1998). What is a Document?. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 48(9), 804-809. Preprint available at: http://sims.berkeley.edu/~buckland/whatdoc.html

Shannon, C.E. & Weaver, W. (1963/1949). The mathematical theory of communication (pp. 31-35 only). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

Jacob, E.K. (2001). The everyday world of work: two approaches to the investigation of classification in context. Journal of Documentation 57(1), 76-99.

Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: the embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought (p. 3-36). New York: Basic Books.

Roszak, T. (1998). Evolution and the transcendence of mind. Perspectives 1(2). Available at: http://www.mentalhelp.net/poc/view_doc.php?type=doc&id=274 [Originally published in Network, May 15, 1996.]

Solomon, P. (2000). Exploring structuration in knowledge organization: implications for managing the tension between stability and dynamism. In C. Beghtol, L.C. Howarth and N.J. Williamson, Dynamism and stability in knowledge organization: proceedings of the Sixth International ISKO Conference, 10-13 July 2000, Toronto, Canada (pp. 254-260). Würzburg, Germany: Ergon Verlag.

Bower, B. (1996). Fighting stereotype stigma. ScinceNewsOnline (June 29, 1996). Available at: http://www.sciencenews.org/sn_arch/6_29_96/bob1.htm

DeCandido, G. A. (1999). Bibliographic good vs. evil in Buffy the Vampire Slayer. American Libraries (September), 44-47.

Engle, M. (1998). Remythologizing work: the role of archetypal images in the humanization of librarianship. Available at: http://urislib.library.cornell.edu/archetype.html

Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review 63, 81-87.

Jacob, E.K. (2000). The legacy of pragmatism: implications for knowledge organization in a pluralistic universe. In C. Beghtol, L.C. Howarth and N.J. Williamson, Dynamism and stability in knowledge organization: proceedings of the Sixth International ISKO Conference, 10-13 July 2000, Toronto, Canada (pp. 16-22). Würzburg, Germany: Ergon Verlag.

Parsons, J., and Wand, Y. (1997). Choosing classes in conceptual modeling. Communications of the ACM 40 (6), 63-69.

Tesar, P. (1991). The other side of types. In G. Rockcastle (Ed.) Midgård Monographs of Architectural Theory and Criticism, Number 2 (p. 165-175).

Ward, T.B. (1993). Processing biases, knowledge and context in category formation. In G.V. Nakamura, D.L. Medin & R. Taraban (Eds.), Categorization by humans and Machines. Psychology of learning and motivation vol. 29, (pp. 257-281). San Diego: Academic Press.

Ambroziak, J., and Woods, W.A. (1988). Natural language technology in precision content retrieval. Palo Alto, CA: Sun Microsystems Laboratories, Available at: http://www.sun.com/research/techrep/1998/smli_tr-98-69.pdf

Bowker, L. (2000). A corpus-based investigation of variation in the organization of medical terms. In C. Beghtol, L.C. Howarth and N.J. Williamson, Dynamism and stability in knowledge organization: proceedings of the Sixth International ISKO Conference, 10-13 July 2000, Toronto, Canada (pp. 71-76). Würzburg, Germany: Ergon Verlag.

Broughton, V. (2000). Structural, linguistic and mathematical elements in indexing languages and search engines: implications for the use of index languages in electronic and non-LIS environments. In C. Beghtol, L.C. Howarth and N.J. Williamson, Dynamism and stability in knowledge organization: proceedings of the Sixth International ISKO Conference, 10-13 July 2000, Toronto, Canada (pp. 206-212). Würzburg, Germany: Ergon Verlag.

Huber, J. and Gillaspy, M.L. (2000). An examination of the discourse of homosexuality as reflected in medical vocabularies, classificatory structures, and information resources. In C. Beghtol, L.C. Howarth and N.J. Williamson, Dynamism and stability in knowledge organization: proceedings of the Sixth International ISKO Conference, 10-13 July 2000, Toronto, Canada (pp. 219-223). Würzburg, Germany: Ergon Verlag.

Jacob, E. K. (1994). Classification and crossdisciplinary communication: breaching the boundaries imposed by classificatory structure. In H. Albrechtsen and S. Oernager (Eds.), Knowledge organization and quality management: Advances in knowledge organization, vol. 4 (p. 101-108). Frankfurt/Main: Indeks Verlag.

Soergel, D. (1985). Chapter 12: Terminological control (p. 213-222). Chapter 13: Index language functions (p. 225-249). Organizing information , San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Jacob, E.K., & Albrechtsen, H. (1997). Constructing reality: the role of dialogue in the development of classificatory structures. In I. C. McIlwaine (Ed.), Knowledge organization for information retrieval: Proceedings of the 6th International Study Conference on Classification Research, 14-16 June 1997, London (pp. 42-50). The Hague, Netherlands: International Federation for Documentation.

Chan, L.M. and Hodges, T.L. (2000). The Library of Congress Classification. In R. Marcella and A. Maltby (Eds.), The future of classification (p. 105-128). Aldershot: Gower.

Dewey, M. (1972/1876). Catalogs and cataloging. In A. F. Painter (Ed.), Reader in classification and descriptive cataloging (p. 7-14). NCR Microcard Editions.

Donovan, J. M. (1991). Patron expectations about collocation: measuring the difference between the psychologically real and the really real. Cataloging and classification quarterly, 13 (2), 23-41.

Frohmann, B. (1994). The social construction of knowledge organization: the case of Melvil Dewey. In H. Albrechtsen and S. Oernager (Eds.), Knowledge organization and quality management: Advances in knowledge organization, vol. 4 (p. 109-117). Frankfurt/Main: Indeks Verlag.

Hunter, E. (2000). Do we still need classification. In R. Marcella and A. Maltby (Eds.), The future of classification (p. 1-18). Aldershot: Gower.

Mann, T. (Accessed 2000.01.06). Height shelving threat to the nations libraries. Available at: http://www.lisnews.com/misc/Height_Shelving_Threat.html [Public comments available at: http://www.lisnews.com/article.php3?sid=20000815200405 ]

Pietris, M. K. (1990). Library of Congress classification. In B. G. Bengtson and J. S. Hill (Eds.), Classification of library materials: current and future potential for providing access (p. 60-80). New York: Neal-Schuman Publishers.

Shera, J. H. (1965/1950). Classification as the basis of bibliographic organization. In Libraries and the organization of knowledge (p. 77-96). Hamden, CT: Archon.

Shera, J. H. (1965/1961). The dignity and advancement of Bacon. In Libraries and the organization of knowledge (p. 143-150). Hamden, CT: Archon.

Williamson, N. (1998). An interdisciplinary world and discipline based classification. In W. M. el Hadi, J. Maniez, & S. A. Pollitt (eds.), Structures and relations in knowledge organization: Proceedings of the Fifth International ISKO Conference, 25-29 August 1998, Lille, France (p. 116-124). Würzburg, Germany: Ergon Verlag

Foskett, A.C. (2000). The future of faceted classification. In R. Marcella and A. Maltby (Eds.), The future of classification (p. 69-80). Aldershot: Gower.

Maniez, J. (1991). Are classifications still relevant in databases? In G. Negrini, T. Farnesi and D. Benediktsson (Eds.), Documentary languages and databases (pp. 120-129). Frankfurt/Main: Indeks Verlag.

Priss, U. (2000). Comparing classification systems using facets. In C. Beghtol, L.C. Howarth and N.J. Williamson, Dynamism and stability in knowledge organization: proceedings of the Sixth International ISKO Conference, 10-13 July 2000, Toronto, Canada (pp. 170-175). Würzburg, Germany: Ergon Verlag.

Priss, U., and Jacob, E.K. (1999). Utilizing faceted structures for information systems design. In L. Woods (Ed.), Knowledge, Creation, Organization and Use: Proceedings of the 62nd ASIS Annual Meeting (pp. 203-212). Medford, NJ: Information Today.

Ranganathan, S. R. (1962). Canons of classification. In Elements of library classification (p. 45-70). Bombay: Asia Publishing House.

Sanders, G. L. (1995). Introduction to data modeling concepts. In Data modeling (p. 16-38). Danvers, Mass.: Boyd Frasier.

Soergel, D. (1985). Chapter 14: Index language structure I: conceptual. In Organizing information (pp. 251-287). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Williamson, N., and McIlwaine, I. C. (1994). A feasibility study on the restructuring of the Universal Decimal Classification into a fully faceted classification system. In H. Albrechtsen and S. Oernager (Eds.), Advances in Knowledge Organization, vol. 4 (pp. 406-413). Frankfurt/Main: Indeks Verlag.

Kilgour, F. G. (1998). Origins of coordinate searching. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 48(4), 340-348.

Svenonius, E., et al. (1992). Automation of chain indexing. In N. J. Williamson and M. Hudon (Eds.), Classification research for knowledge representation and organization (p. 351-364). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Eddison, B., and Batty, D. (1988). Database design: words, words, words -- descriptors, subject headings, index terms. Database 11 (6), 109-113. [This is the first of two related articles and serves as an introduction to the following article by David Batty.]

Bearman, D., and Peterson, T. (1991). Retrieval requirements of faceted thesauri in interactive information systems. In S. M. Humphrey and B. H. Kwasnik (Eds.), Advances in classification research, vol. 1 (p. 9-23). Medford, NJ: Learned Information.

Calzolari, N. (1988). The dictionary and the thesaurus can be combined. In M. W. Evans (Ed.), Relational models of the lexicon (p. 75-95). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Johnson, E. H. (1995). A hypertext interface for a searcher's thesaurus. Available at: http://csdl.tamu.edu/DL95/papers/johncoch/johncoch.html

Riesthuis, G.J.A. (2000). Multilingual subject access and the Guidelines for the extablishment and development of multilingual thesauri. In C. Beghtol, L.C. Howarth and N.J. Williamson, Dynamism and stability in knowledge organization: proceedings of the Sixth International ISKO Conference, 10-13 July 2000, Toronto, Canada (pp. 131-135). Würzburg, Germany: Ergon Verlag.

Williamson, N.J. (2000). Thesauri in the digital age: stability and dynamism in their development and use. In C. Beghtol, L.C. Howarth and N.J. Williamson, Dynamism and stability in knowledge organization: proceedings of the Sixth International ISKO Conference, 10-13 July 2000, Toronto, Canada (pp. 268-274). Würzburg, Germany: Ergon Verlag.

Baca, Murtha (Ed.). (1998). Introduction to metadata: pathways to digital information. Table of contents available at: http://www.getty.edu/gri/standard/intrometadata/toc.htm Also available at: http://www.getty.edu/research/institute/standards/intrometadata/index.html [This book is available in its entirety online. It includes: Defining metadata by Anne J. Gilliland-Swetland; Metadata and the World Wide Web by Tony Gill; Crosswalks, metadata, mapping and interoperability by Willy Cromwell-Kessler; and A crosswalk of metadata standards. This book also contains a section entitled Acronyms with selected web addresses that provides links to various metadata resources. You may also want to take at look at the Glossary.]

Berners-Lee, T. (1996). The world wide web: past, present and future. Available at: http://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/1996/ppf.html

Buckland, M., & et al. (1999). Mapping entry vocabulary to unfamiliar metadata vocabularies. D-Lib Magazine 5(1). Available at: http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january99/buckland/01buckland.html

Duval, E. et al. (2002). Metadata principles and practicalities. D-Lib Magazine 8(4). Available at: http://www.dlib.org/dlib/april02/weibel/04weibel.html

Lagoze, C. (1997). From static to dynamic surrogates: resource discovery in the digital age. D-Lib Magazine, 3(June 1997). Available at: http://www.dlib.org/dlib/june97/06lagoze.html

Pollock, J. T. (2002). Integration's dirty little secret: It's a matter of semantics. Modulant white paper. Available at: http://me.jtpollock.us/pubs/2002.07-dirty_little_secret.pdf

Vellucci, S.L. (1997). Options for organizing electronic resources: the coexistence of metadata. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science, 24(1). Available at: http://www.asis.org/Bulletin/Oct-97/vellucci.htm

Golder, S. A. & Huberman, B. A. (2005). The structure of collaborative tagging systems [arXiv:cs/0508082v1]. arXiv.org. Available at: http://arxiv.org/abs/cs/0508082

Kipp, M. E. I. (2007). Tagging for health information organisation and retrieval. In Tennis, J. T. (Ed.), Proceedings North American Symposium on Knowledge Organization 2007, 14-15 June 2007, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (pp. 63-74). Available at: http://dlist.sir.arizona.edu/1909/

Kipp, M.E.I. & Campbell, D.G. (2006). Patterns and inconsistencies in collaborative tagging systems: an examination of tagging practices. In Proceedings of the 2006 Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 3-8 November 2006, Austin, Texas. Available at: http://eprints.rclis.org/archive/00008315/

Kipp, M.E.I. (2007). @toread and cool: tagging for time, task and emotion. 8th Information Architecture Summit, 22-27 March 2007, Las Vegas, Nevada. Available at: http://dlist.sir.arizona.edu/1947/

Kipp, M.E.I. (2006). Complementary or discrete contexts in online indexing: a comparison of user, creator, and intermediary keywords. In H. Moukdad (ED.), Information Science Revisited: Approaches to Innovation: Proceedings of the Canadian Association for Information Science, 1-3 June 2006, York University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. (Forthcoming in Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science.) Available at: http://dlist.sir.arizona.edu/1533/

Bouaud, J., Bachimont, B., Charlet, J., & Zweigenbaum, P. (1995). Methodological principles for structuring an "ontology". (Report No. DIAM Rapport Interne RI-95-148). Paris: Départment Intelligence Artificielle et Médecine [DIAM]. [Presented at the IJCAI'95 Workshop on Basic Ontological Issues in Knowledge Sharing, 19 August 1995, Montréal, Canada.]. Available at: http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/bouaud95methodological.html

Gruber, T. R. (Accessed 2001.05.16). What is an ontology? Ontologies as a specification mechanism. Available at: http://www-ksl.stanford.edu/kst/what-is-an-ontology.html

Gruber, T.R. (1993). Toward principles for the design of ontologies used for knowledge sharing. In: N. Guarino & R. Poli (Eds), Formal ontology in conceptual analysis and knowledge representation: Proceedings of the International Workshop on Formal Ontology, Padova, Italy. Deventer, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Available at: http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/gruber93toward.html [Also available at http://www-ksl.stanford.edu/knowledge-sharing/papers/onto-design.ps and as Technical Report KSL 93-04, Knowledge Systems Laboratory, Stanford University.]

Mizoguchi, R. (2003). Tutorial on ontological engineering. Part 1: Introduction to Ontological Engineering. New Generation Computing 21(4), 365-384. Available at: http://www.ei.sanken.osaka-u.ac.jp/pub/miz/Part1-pdf2.pdf

Mizoguchi, R. (2004). Tutorial on ontological engineering. Part 2: Ontology development, tools and languages. New Generation Computing 22(1), 61-96. Available at: http://www.ei.sanken.osaka-u.ac.jp/pub/miz/Part1-pdf2.pdf

Mizoguchi, R. (2004). Tutorial on ontological engineering. Part 3: Advanced course of ontological engineering. New Generation Computing 22(2), 198-220. Available at: http://www.ei.sanken.osaka-u.ac.jp/pub/miz/Part3V3.pdf

Noy, N. F. & McGuinness, D. L. (2001). Ontology development 101: a guide to creating your first ontology. Stanford Knowledge Systems Laboratory Technical Report KSL-01-05 [Stanford Medical Informatics Technical Report SMI-2001-0880]. Available at: http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/papers/ontology-tutorial-noy-mcguinness-abstract.html

Austin, D. L. (1994). An image is not an object: but it can help. In A. H. Helal and J. W. Weiss (Eds.), Resource sharing: new technologies as a must for universal availability of information, (p. 277-294). Essen: Universitätsbibliothek Essen.

Gazan, R. (2000). Whose truth? Context and meaning in digital image collections. Available at: http://skipper.gseis.ucla.edu/students/is287a/html/All/Final/rgazan.html

Grund, A. (1993). ICONCLASS: On subject analysis of iconographic representations of works of art. Knowledge organization, 20, 20-29.

Jack, C. (1999). State of the arts: current applications for indexing images. Available at: http://www.slis.ualberta.ca/599/cjack/599.htm

O'Connor, B. C. (1996). Pictures, aboutness, and user-generated descriptors. Available at: http://www.asis.org/SIG/SIGVIS/b_oconnor.html

Instructor: Elin Jacob ejacob@indiana.edu
Office:	002D SLIS
Office phone:	812-855-4671
Office hours:	Tuesday 3:00-4:30 pm or by appointment
Assistant Instructor: Nicolas George nlgeorge@indiana.edu
Office:	002D SLIS
Office phone:	812-855-0820
Office hours:	Monday 2:00-3:30 pm or by appointment

Grade	GPA	MEANING
A	4.0	Outstanding achievement. Student performance demonstrates full command of the course materials and evinces a high level of originality and/or creativity that far surpasses course expectations
A-	3.7	Excellent achievement. Student performance demonstrates thorough knowledge of the course materials and exceeds course expectations by completing all requirements in a superior manner
B+	3.3	Very good work. Student performance demonstrates above-average comprehension of the course materials and exceeds course expectations on all tasks as defined in the course syllabus
B	3.0	Good work. Student performance meets designated course expectations, demonstrates understanding of the course materials and is at an acceptable level
B-	2.7	Marginal work. Student performance demonstrates incomplete understanding of course materials.
C+ C	2.3 2.0	Unsatisfactory work. Student performance demonstrates incomplete and inadequate understanding of course materials
C- D+ D D-	1.7 1.3 1.0 .07	Unacceptable work. Coursework performed at this level will not count toward the MLS or MIS degree. For the course to count towards the degree, the student must repeat the course with a passing grade.
F	0.0	Failing. Student may continue in program only with permission of the Dean.

COURSE SYLLABUS

Grading

Late Submissions

Incompletes

Grading Scale