Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: "Bizarre" Taxonomies (was Re: [TaxoCoP] Re: new Taxonomy Community of Practice motto desperately needed...)

Expand Messages
  • Donna M. Fritzsche
    Keith, Very good points. In the IA world, we would call what you are describing as Context . What is the context of use? What are the goals and drivers? What
    Message 1 of 37 , Feb 1, 2009
    • 0 Attachment

      Keith,

      Very good points.

      In the IA world, we would call what  you are describing as "Context". What is the context of use? What are the goals and drivers? What is the venacular of the primary users?  etc.

      Donna Fritzsche



      -----Original Message-----
      From: Keipat Patkei
      Sent: Feb 1, 2009 1:24 AM
      To: TaxoCoP@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: "Bizarre" Taxonomies (was Re: [TaxoCoP] Re: new Taxonomy Community of Practice motto desperately needed...)

      Karna, Patrick,

      Excellent questions and comments. Take this as either overstatement or "staying on message," but I don't know if I would ever consider a taxonomy or thesaurus "bizarre" until I was absolutely certain I knew the circumstances prompting its creation/developmen t or the users for which the systems were created. I recall the sociology term, "standpoint theory," having application here.

      Personally, "bizarre" has a negative ring to it, and in the the realm of controlled vocabulary work, it starts to sound, to me, like, "I've heard some "crazy" languages, seen some "odd" cultures, and read some "dumb" cultural narratives." Or maybe my personal experience and use of the word "bizarre" needs to be altered or extended? "Chaotic" seems relative to me, too.

      All systems exist in relative states of communication, application, perspective, experience, and so on, with people ("imperfect" ) and semi-automated systems (likewise "imperfect") . Fibonacci, Newton, Tesla, Einstein, Turing, Gates...all "imperfect" along with a great deal of what they produced. This is why linguistics/ semantics play such an important role, if not the central role, in controlled vocabulary work.

      For some situations, a "bizarre" taxonomy or thesaurus might be absolutely necessary particularly in the realms of science or discovery--with "right" or "perfection" comes "end." And here's some imperfection to end on: It's never been the same world for everyone.

      Much appreciate the questions and feedback. Thanks, again.

      Keith DeWeese

      --- On Sat, 1/31/09, Patrick Lambe <plambe@straitsknowl edge.com> wrote:

      > From: Patrick Lambe <plambe@straitsknowl edge.com>
      > Subject: Re: [TaxoCoP] Re: new Taxonomy Community of Practice motto desperately needed....
      > To: TaxoCoP@yahoogroups .com
      > Date: Saturday, January 31, 2009, 8:22 PM
      > Great questions Karna - i meant discovery in a specialised
      > sense of finding useful stuff that you weren't aware of
      > or necessarily looking for. Sometimes this does pose
      > quandaries, but this is proably because your mental model is
      > being challenged, which is not necessarily a bad thing.
      >
      > And yes, chaotic taxonomies do make one's thinking
      > muddled - or rather they make it hard to think and see
      > clearly.
      >
      > P
      >
      > Patrick Lambe
      >
      > weblog: www.greenchameleon. com
      > website: www.straitsknowledg e.com
      > book: www.organisingknowl edge.com
      >
      > Have you seen our KM Method Cards?
      > http://www.straitsk nowledge. com/store/
      >
      >
      >
      > On Jan 31, 2009, at 8:28 PM, O'Dea wrote:
      >
      > >
      > > HI Patrick
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > I like your motto as well
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > However what if you discover what you don’t want to
      > find (a quandary for you)
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Also Patrick wouldn’t a chaotic taxonomy make your
      > thinking muddled. Yes I know I am off on a tangent but I
      > have seen some very bizarre taxos and thesauri in my time as
      > we all have.

    • Patrick Lambe
      Actually, that sense of FOD does have some faint taxonomy resonances!! P Patrick Lambe weblog: www.greenchameleon.com website: www.straitsknowledge.com book:
      Message 37 of 37 , Feb 2, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Actually, that sense of FOD does have some faint taxonomy resonances!!

        P

        Patrick Lambe

        website: www.straitsknowledge.com

        Have you seen our KM Method Cards?   http://www.straitsknowledge.com/store/



        On Feb 3, 2009, at 2:37 PM, Jay Maechtlen wrote:

        Gabriel Tanase wrote:
        > This one gets my vote.
        > Thanks, Patrick!
        > 
        > 2009/1/30 Patrick Lambe <plambe@straitsknowl edge.com
        > <mailto:plambe@straitsknowl edge.com>>
        > 
        > Taxonomies are not just about finding, they also support discovery,
        > and they organise stuff (not just information content, they can also
        > organise work and organise thinking).
        > 
        > I'm into simplicity, so I'd suggest "Taxonomies: Find, Organise,
        > Discover"
        > 
        Coming late to this: in some other fields, "FOD" is not desirable...
        (think Foreign Object Damage)

        aside from that, sounds good.

        I'll admit, several of the others would make great bumper stickers,
        license plate frames, coffee mugs, etc.

        Regards
        Jay


      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.