[sc34wg3] RM comment: parid2901
Patrick Durusau
sc34wg3@isotopicmaps.org
Fri, 21 Feb 2003 09:15:13 -0500
--------------030603000907040802000804
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Steve,
Steve Pepper wrote:
> At 16:01 19.02.2003 -0500, Patrick Durusau wrote:
>
>> I think we need to give serious consideration to changing the name of
>> the "SLUO." One suggestion that comes to mind is the "Unique Subject
>> Location Objective" or "USLO." I don't know that it is really
>> necessary to include the "location" language in the objective and
>> would be just as pleased with "Unique Subject Objective" or "USO."
>> That a subject has a unique location in the topic map is a result of
>> the merging rules, and is the key to the paradigm but I don't know
>> that the current name is a real marketing winner.
>
>
> I have earlier proposed the term "collocation objective", which has
> the same basic connotation and a good pedigree in library science.
> (See for example Elaine Svenonius' book, "The Intellectual Foundation
> of Information Organization".)
Thanks for the suggestion! I did a quick search and found two rather
interesting citations for the term "collocation."
The first, Some Observations on Metadata and Digital Libraries
(http://www.loc.gov/catdir/bibcontrol/arms_paper.html) cites Svenonius
and says:
"Elaine Svenonius suggests that it is helpful to distinguish between the
objective of finding or locating a particular entity (known item) and
the collocation objective, which allows a user to find sets of entities,
for instance works by the same author or on the same topic.(8) She also
suggests that a navigation objective be added to reflect the wish of
users to find other works related to a given work.(9) ...In this
article, the focus is on metadata that leads users to resources in
digital libraries (discovery, finding, collocation, navigation) and lets
them choose resources for the task at hand (identification, selection)."
The second, The Bradford OPAC 2
(http://www.bopac2.comp.brad.ac.uk/~bopac2/report/), contrasts
collocation with what is described as "clustering," but in an
application space. From what I can gather from the described behavior of
clustering, list a work under multiple headings, etc., are all doable
under "collacation" as understood in the topic map sense.
>
> It is not quite so excruciatingly precise but its use in our context
> can be defined with the same precision. It would certainly be more
> readily understandable to people outside the inner sanctum.
So we would be using collocation in a somewhat broader sense of the
word, perhaps better, applying it more broadly than to works by a single
author, such that all the works related to a "given work" are also
discoverable from a single location?
I like the idea of a term that works in at least one of the communities
that should be heavy users of topic maps. A lot of commercial ventures,
the larger ones at any rate, have librarians on staff so a familiar term
may help there as well.
Hope the week is ending on a high note for everyone!
Patrick
--
Patrick Durusau
Director of Research and Development
Society of Biblical Literature
pdurusau@emory.edu
Co-Editor, ISO Reference Model for Topic Maps
--------------030603000907040802000804
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1">
<title></title>
</head>
<body>
Steve,<br>
<br>
Steve Pepper wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid5.1.0.14.2.20030220195454.0204f408@mail.ontopia.net">At 16:01 19.02.2003
-0500, Patrick Durusau wrote: <br>
<blockquote type="cite">I think we need to give serious consideration to
changing the name of the "SLUO." One suggestion that comes to mind is the
"Unique Subject Location Objective" or "USLO." I don't know that it is really
necessary to include the "location" language in the objective and would
be just as pleased with "Unique Subject Objective" or "USO." That a subject
has a unique location in the topic map is a result of the merging rules,
and is the key to the paradigm but I don't know that the current name is
a real marketing winner. <br>
</blockquote>
<br>
I have earlier proposed the term "collocation objective", which has the same
basic connotation and a good pedigree in library science. (See for example
Elaine Svenonius' book, "The Intellectual Foundation of Information Organization".)
<br>
</blockquote>
Thanks for the suggestion! I did a quick search and found two rather interesting
citations for the term "collocation."<br>
<br>
The first, Some Observations on Metadata and Digital Libraries (<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.loc.gov/catdir/bibcontrol/arms_paper.html">http://www.loc.gov/catdir/bibcontrol/arms_paper.html</a>)
cites Svenonius and says:<br>
<br>
"Elaine Svenonius suggests that it is helpful to distinguish between the
objective of <i>finding</i> or <i>locating</i> a particular entity (known
item) and the <i>collocation</i> objective, which allows a user to find sets
of entities, for instance works by the same author or on the same topic.(8)
She also suggests that a <i>navigation</i> objective be added to reflect
the wish of users to find other works related to a given work.(9) ...In
this article, the focus is on metadata that leads users to resources in digital
libraries (<i>discovery, finding, collocation, navigation</i>) and lets them
choose resources for the task at hand (<i>identification, selection</i>)."
<h2></h2>
The second, The Bradford OPAC 2 (<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.bopac2.comp.brad.ac.uk/~bopac2/report/">http://www.bopac2.comp.brad.ac.uk/~bopac2/report/</a>),
contrasts collocation with what is described as "clustering," but in an application
space. From what I can gather from the described behavior of clustering,
list a work under multiple headings, etc., are all doable under "collacation"
as understood in the topic map sense. <br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid5.1.0.14.2.20030220195454.0204f408@mail.ontopia.net"><br>
It is not quite so excruciatingly precise but its use in our context can
be defined with the same precision. It would certainly be more readily understandable
to people outside the inner sanctum. <br>
</blockquote>
So we would be using collocation in a somewhat broader sense of the word,
perhaps better, applying it more broadly than to works by a single author,
such that all the works related to a "given work" are also discoverable from
a single location?<br>
<br>
I like the idea of a term that works in at least one of the communities that
should be heavy users of topic maps. A lot of commercial ventures, the larger
ones at any rate, have librarians on staff so a familiar term may help there
as well.<br>
<br>
Hope the week is ending on a high note for everyone!<br>
<br>
Patrick<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="$mailwrapcol">--
Patrick Durusau
Director of Research and Development
Society of Biblical Literature
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:pdurusau@emory.edu">pdurusau@emory.edu</a>
Co-Editor, ISO Reference Model for Topic Maps
</pre>
<br>
</body>
</html>
--------------030603000907040802000804--