You are on page 1of 100

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.

KO

KNOWLEDGE ORGANIZATION

Official Quarterly Journal of the International Society for Knowledge Organization

ISSN 0943 7444

International Journal devoted to Concept Theory, Classification, Indexing and Knowledge Representation

Contents
Editorial

Book Reviews

Richard P. Smiraglia.
ISKO 10s Bookshelf:
An Editorial ..................................................................... 187

Eric R. Scerri. The Periodic Table: Its Story and


Its Significance. Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2007. xxii, 346 pages.
ISBN-13: 978-0-19-530573-9. .........................................251

Articles

Marc Ereshefsky. The Poverty of the Linnaean


Hierarchy: A Philosophical Study of Biological
Taxonomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2007. x, 316 p.
ISBN-13: 978-0-521-03883-6. .........................................255

Catherine Minter.
Liberating the Responsibility to
Think for Oneself:
The Warburg Library Classification. .............................. 192
Ok nam Park.
Opening Ontology Design:
A Study of the Implications of Knowledge
Organization for Ontology Design. .............................. 209
Wilfred Dolfsma.
Making Knowledge Work:
Intra-firm Networks, Gifts, and Innovation. ................ 222
Ben Christensen.
Minoritization vs. Universalization:
Lesbianism and Male Homosexuality
in LCSH and LCC.......................................................... 229
Fidelia Ibekwe-SanJuan.
The impact of geographic location on the
development of a specialty field: A case study
of Sloan Digital Sky Survey in Astronomy. ................... 239

Rachel Cooper. Classifying Madness: A


Philosophical Examination of the Diagnostic and
Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Berlin:
Springer, 2005. vii, 172 p. (Philosophy and
Medicine, vol. 86).
ISBN: 978-1-4020-3344-5 (hbk.). ...................................259

ISKO News. .....................................................................264

Knowledge Organization Literature


35 (2008) No. 4 ................................................................266
Personal Author Index
35 (2008) No. 4 ................................................................281

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4

KNOWLEDGE ORGANIZATION
Official Quarterly Journal of the International Society for Knowledge Organization

KO
ISSN 0943 7444

International Journal devoted to Concept Theory, Classification, Indexing and Knowledge Representation

KNOWLEDGE ORGANIZATION
This journal is the organ of the INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY
FOR KNOWLEDGE ORGANIZATION (General Secretariat:
H. Peter OHLY, Social Science Information Center, Lennestr. 30,
D-53113 Bonn, Germany.

Editors
Dr. Richard P. SMIRAGLIA (Editor-in-Chief), Palmer School of
Library and Information Science, Long Island University, 720
Northern Blvd., Brookville NY 11548 USA.
Email: Richard.Smiraglia@liu.edu
Dr. Clment ARSENAULT (Book Review Editor), cole de bibliothconomie et des sciences de linformation, Universit de
Montral, C.P. 6128, succ. Centre-ville, Montral (QC) H3C 3J7,
Canada. Email: clement.arsenault@umontreal.ca
Dr. Ia MCILWAINE (Literature Editor), Research Fellow. School
of Library, Archive & Information Studies, University College
London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT U.K. Email:
i.mcilwaine@ucl.ac.uk
Dr. Nancy WILLIAMSON (Classification Research News Editor), Faculty of Information Studies, University of Toronto, 140
St. George Street, Toronto, Ontario M5S 3G6 Canada.
Email: william@fis.utoronto.ca
Hanne ALBRECHTSEN, Institute of Knowledge Sharing, Bureauet, Slotsgade 2, 2nd floor DK-2200 Copenhagen N Denmark.
Email: hanne.albrechtsen@knowshare.dk
Gabriel MCKEE (Editorial Assistant), Palmer School of Library
and Information Science, Long Island University.

Consulting Editors
Dr. Clare BEGHTOL, Faculty of Information Studies, University
of Toronto, 140 St. George Street, Toronto, Ontario M5S 3G6,
Canada. Email: clare.beghtol@utoronto.ca
Dr. Gerhard BUDIN, Dept. of Philosophy of Science, University
of Vienna, Sensengasse 8, A-1090 Wien, Austria.
Email: gerhard.budin@univie.ac.at
Prof. Jess GASCN GARCA, Facultat de Biblioteconomia i
Documentaci, Universitat de Barcelona, C. Melcior de Palau,
140, 08014 Barcelona, Spain. Email: gascon@ub.edu
Claudio GNOLI, University of Pavia, Mathematics Department
Library, via Ferrata 1, I-27100 Pavia, Italy. Email: gnoli@aib.it

Dr. Birger HJRLAND, Royal School of Library and Information Science, Copenhagen Denmark. Email: bh@db.dk
Dr. Barbara H. KWASNIK, Professor, School of Information
Studies, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY 13244 USA, (315) 4434547 voice, (315) 443-4506 fax. Email: bkwasnik@syr.edu
Dr. Jens-Erik MAI, Faculty of Information Studies, University
of Toronto, 140 St. George Street, Toronto, Ontario M5S 3G6,
Canada. Email: je.mai@utoronto.ca
Ms. Joan S. MITCHELL, Editor in Chief, Dewey Decimal Classification, OCLC Online Computer Library Center, Inc., 6565
Frantz Road, Dublin, OH 43017-3395 USA.
Email: joan_mitchell@oclc.org
Dr. Widad MUSTAFA el HADI, URF IDIST, Universit Charles
de Gaulle Lille 3, BP 149, 59653 Villeneuve DAscq, France
H. Peter OHLY, IZ Sozialwissenschaften, Lennestr. 30, 53113
Bonn Germany. Email: oh@iz-soz.de
Dr. Hope A. OLSON, School of Information Studies, 522 Bolton
Hall, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI 53201
USA. Email: holson@uwm.edu
Ms. Annelise Mark PEJTERSEN, Systems Analysis Dept., Risoe
National Laboratory, P.O. Box 49, DK-4000 Roskilde, Denmark
Dr. M. P. SATIJA, Guru Nanak Dev University, School of Library
and Information Science, Amritsar-143 005, India
Dr. Otto SECHSER, In der Ey 37, CH-8047 Zrich, Switzerland
Dr. Winfried SCHMITZ-ESSER, Salvatorgasse 23, 6060 Hall, Tirol, Austria.
Dr. Dagobert SOERGEL, College of Information Studies, Hornbake Bldg. (So. Wing), Room 4105, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742. Email: dsoergel@umd.edu
Dr. Eduard R. SUKIASYAN, Vozdvizhenka 3, RU-101000, Moscow, Russia.
Dr. Joseph T. TENNIS, The Information School of the University
of Washington, Box 352840, Mary Gates Hall Ste 370, Seattle WA
98195-2840 USA. E-mail: jtennis@u.washington.edu.
Dr. Martin van der WALT, Department of Information Science,
University of Stellenbosch, Private Bag X1, Stellenbosch 7602,
South Africa. Email: msvdw@sun.ac.za
Prof. Dr. Harald ZIMMERMANN, Softex, Schmollerstrasse 31,
D-66111 Saarbrcken, Germany

Dr. Rebecca GREEN, Assistant Editor, Dewey Decimal Classification, Dewey Editorial Office, Library of Congress, Decimal
Classification Division , 101 Independence Ave., S.E., Washington,
DC 20540-4330, USA. Email: greenre@oclc.org
Dr. Jos Augusto Chaves GUIMARES, Departamento de Cincia da Infromao, Universidade Estadual PaulistaUNESP, Av.
Hygino Muzzi Filho 737, 17525-900 Marlia SP Brazil. Email:
guima@marilia.unesp.br

Founded under the title International Classification in 1974 by Dr.


Ingetraut Dahlberg, the founding president of ISKO. Dr. Dahlberg served as the journal's editor from 1974 to 1997, and as its
publisher (Indeks Verlag of Frankfurt) from 1981 to 1997.

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


R. P. Smiraglia. ISKO 10s Bookshelf. An Editorial

187

ISKO 10s Bookshelf


An Editorial
Richard P. Smiraglia,
Editor-in-Chief
The 10th International ISKO
Conference is now history,
and it was a dynamic bit of history at that. Knowledge organization (the domain) is lively and engaged and engaging, and all of us who work in
the domain are in a good spot
to benefit from the new trajectories provided by the scholars
who brought their research forward this year. As is
our custom in this journal, I will leave it to the Classification editor to prepare a full report on the conference. But the Proceedings volume (Arsenault and
Tennis 2008), as usual, is a rich resource for analysis
of the domain at this particular moment in time. By
studying the contents, and in particular by applying
bibliometric techniques, we can gain useful insight into the direction of the evolution of knowledge organization. Hjrland (2002) includes bibliometric techniques in his list of eleven approaches to domain analysis because, as he says (p. 436), it is empirical and
based on detailed analysis of connections between individual documents. With reference (and due deference) to Whites (2003) analysis of authors as citers,
I hereby present this brief analysis of what one might
find on the bookshelves of this years ISKO authors.
1. About the Conference Papers
The conference itself included 53 papers; the Proceedings contained also 5 papers not presented at the
conference. Of these, one paper had no citations at
all. And the keynote address was not included in the
Proceedings and so was not a part of the present analysis. There were, then, 57 papers available for bibliometric analysis. As Hjrland (among others)
pointed out, one weakness of bibliometric technique
is the quality of the available data. Often bibliometric
analyses depend upon the products of indexing ser-

vices. In this case, the data were compiled manually


from the Proceedings. Because the references were not
structured uniformly, the process of converting the
references from the 57 papers into usable data took
rather a long while. For those who wish to replicate
this work I have posted the basic Excel spreadsheet of
citations on my website (go to http://smiraglia.org
and look for ISKO).
Co-word analysis of the abstracts, or even of the
full texts of the papers (perfectly feasible given that
the documents are available to ISKO members in
electronic form) would be a good way of approaching
the detailed analysis of intellectual threads in the conference. However, a very simple analysis of title keywords is sufficient here to set the stage for the rest of
this recitation. After removing articles and prepositions 45 key terms remained, of which only two
design and development and facetwere used
more than once. This simple result is a good demonstration of the breadth of the content of the conference. There was no particular depth focus, meaning
there was more extension than intension, which is fitting for the cutting edge report of the latest research
in a discipline. (It is important to acknowledge the
likelihood that what we see here is somehow a reflection of naming conventions, and perhaps is even related to the conference call-for-papers.)
We can achieve a similar result by looking at thematic headings in the programme (Table 1):
KO for information management and retrieval
Epistemological foundations in KO
Models and methods
Users and social context
KO in multilingual and multicultural environments
KO for libraries, archives, and museums
Discourse communities and KO
Evaluation, Systems and tools
Non-textual materials
Table 1. Conference papers by programme theme

11
11
10
8
5
5
3
3
2

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


R. P. Smiraglia. ISKO 10s Bookshelf. An Editorial

188

There is nothing unusual here. Rather it is what


should be expected from an active domain. The main
thrust is epistemology, models, and IRin other
words, depth of intensionbut there is also significant outreach to new user groups, such as the hearing-impaired, children, and people with Alzheimers
disease. Still, this will be useful for comparison at the
end of our analysis. We turn next to works cited by
this years authors.

occurred in 1997. So, while there is great breadth in


the citations, and while there is a decidedly humanistic bent, the date distribution suggests heavy reliance on recent worka hallmark of the sciences.
2.1 Most Cited Journals
Our authors cited a remarkable 129. Table 3 shows
the very high end of the distribution. The following
were the most cited:

2. Cited References from ISKO 10


Knowledge Organization

The authors of the 57 papers in the Proceedings employed 793 references. The mean was 13.6 per paper,
ranging from 0 (Tebe and Marcos) to 34 (Howarth).
The median was 17 and the mode was 13, which suggests again that there is great breadth and little overlap in the references across all of the papers. The distribution of resource types shows heavy reliance on
monographic literature (Table 2).
journal articles, technical reports, papers
online
monographs
chapters in anthologies, encyclopedias, etc.
papers in proceedings
other
total

Journal of the American Society


for Information Science and Technology
Journal of documentation

21
18
15

Cataloging & Classification Quarterly

14

Alzheimers & Dementia

Library & Information Science Research

Information Processing & Management

Journal of Information Science

381

.48

Library Resources & Technical Services

234
56
100
22
793

.30
.07
.13
.02
1.0

Library Quarterly

Library Trends

Table 2. Distribution of resource types

There are a couple of interesting points here. First,


nearly a quarter of the scientific papers cited were in
conference proceedings and not in journals. Lise, Larivire and Archambault (2008, 1781) report the proportion of proceedings cited in library and information science at 7.3%. The proportion here is slightly
higher (12%) but nowhere near the high end reported
for computer science (20%). This suggests that our
ISKO 10 authors have turned to proceedings for
source material that has not yet reached peer-reviewed
journals. Second, the 234 monographs cited represent
almost 1/3 of the total. Such a large reliance on monographic sources usually is associated with humanistic
disciplines. So this tells us that at this moment in time,
this particular segment of our domain has clear characteristics of the humanistic side of a social science.
The majority of citations are, as might be expected, to recent works, most dating from 2000 to the
present. The mean age of a cited work was 10.49
years, but the mode was 2 and the median was 5. Or,
to look at it another way, the median year for citations was 2003 and the mode year was 2006; the mean

Table 3. Most-cited journals

Of course, the list of journals was remarkable for its


disciplinary breadth. In the tail of the distribution
were found Weather and forecasting, Nursing philosophy, Control engineering, and Bioinformatics to name just a few of the more colorful titles.
2.2 Most-Cited Monographs
To get a glimpse of just what was on ISKOs bookshelf, the monographs were sorted and duplicates
counted. The 234 references were to 53 monographs.
Table 4 includes the top end of that distribution
that is, the 6 texts that were cited more than twice.
Functional requirements for bibliographic records:
Final report.
Olson. The power to name
Blair. Language and representation in information
retrieval
Hjrland. Information seeking and subject
representation
Ranganathan. The colon classification
Svenonius. The intellectual foundation of information
organization
Table 4. Most-cited monographs

4
4
3
3
3
3

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


R. P. Smiraglia. ISKO 10s Bookshelf. An Editorial

189

I suppose there is no surprise FRBR should top


the list this year, nor are there really any surprises on
the list. The most interesting result likely is the fact
that, despite the large number of monographic citations, there was actually rather a lot of scatter. That
is, the domain is reliant on texts both old and new,
but the authors at this conference were using a broad
spectrum of sources.
2.3 What Conferences Are Represented?
100 citations were made to papers in the proceedings
of 83 conferences, which again demonstrates a remarkable degree of scatter. The organizations most represented were ACM, ASIST, and ISKO, as might have
been expected, with a respectable showing as well for
CAIS/ACSI, Extreme Markup Languages, IFLA, and
TREC. However, only a few specific conferences received multiple citations. These are listed in table 5.
International ISKO Conference,
7th, 2002 (Granada, Spain)
ISKO Spain, 8th 2007 (Len)
ASIST Annual 2006
Authority Control in the 21st Century:
An Invitational Conference
Conference on Email and Anti-Spam (CEAS)
Hawaii International Conference on Systems
Sciences, 32nd Annual
International Conference on Semantic Web &
Digital Libraries 2007
International ISKO Conference, 3rd, 1994
(Copenhagen)
International ISKO Conference, 8th, 2004
(London)
SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing
systems2004
69th IFLA General Conference and Council),
2003 (Berlin)

5
4
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2

Table 5. Most-cited conferences

Hjrland, B.
Neelameghan, A.
Beghtol, C.
Buckland, M.
Svenonius, E.
Kipp, M.
Ranganathan, S.
Aitchison, J.
Andersen, J.
Broughton, V.
Hansson, J.
Hudon, M.
Shiri, A.
Blair, D.
Dahlberg, I.
Dahlstrm, M.
Electronic Cultural Atlas Initiative.
Foucault, M.
Gnoli, C.
Green, R.
IFLA Study Group FRBR.
Marcoux, Y.
Olson, H. A.
Renear, A.
Shirky, C.
Abbas, J.
Carlyle, A.
Chatman, E.
Frohmann, B.
Greenberg, J.
Jrgensen, C.
Massa, P.
Munk, T.
Murphy, G.
Nilsson, M.
Oliveira, M.
Smiraglia, R.
Szostak, R.
Weibel, St.
Wittgenstein, L.
Yates, J.

18
9
8
8
7
6
6
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3

Table 6. Most-cited authors

2.4 Most Cited Authors


There were 700 unique author citations, meaning
single authors or the first listed in a collaborative
group. This is the clearest indication of scatter, or
breadth, across the conference. In other words, the
contributors to this conference were citing large
numbers of unique resources. When all single occurrence authors were removed, the list yielded 100 names of authors cited two or more times. The top tier
of this distribution, those cited 3 or more times, included 41 names, as shown in table 6.

This distribution includes a core of foundational


authors such as Hjrland, Neelameghan, Buckland,
Aitchison, Beghtol, Svenonius and Dahlberg; a group
of essential classical authors such as Foucault, Ranganathan, Wittgenstein; a group of authors whose works
are both foundational and current, such as Broughton,
Green, Gnoli and Hudon; and a group of recent entrants into the field who are working on hot topics,
such as Kipp, Abbas, Andersen, and Shiri. This group
of authors was used to generate author co-citation
analysis.

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


R. P. Smiraglia. ISKO 10s Bookshelf. An Editorial

190

Figure 1. ACA Plot of Most Cited Authors

2.5 Author Co-citation Analysis


Using the 41 most-cited authors yielded a fairly flat
distribution, by which I mean that there was actually
little co-citationmany cells were empty. Several iterations were required (removing authors with small
co-citation totals) before a useful plot (one that fits
the data reasonably well) was arrived at. This plot,
shown in Figure 1, included 30 authors Stress was .15
(which is acceptably low) and R-squared was .88
(which is acceptably high).
There really are two large clusters. The first stretches from Jrgensson to Renear but is anchored internally by Olson, Green, and Greenberg, and is associated with Foucault. And the second, which is represented by Hjrland and Andersen at one end closely associated with Wittgenstein, and Beghtol and
Broughton at the other end closely associated with
Ranganathan.
It is important to remember that we are looking at
the subjective point of view of the citing authors, in
this case, the authors whose papers constitute the
10th International ISKO Conference. For these
authors, then, there appear to have been some solid
anchors in the domainHjrland, of course, also
Beghtol and Svenonius. Each cluster also is associated with some classical texts in knowledge organiza-

tionRanganathan, for exampleand some seminal


philosophersWittgenstein, for instance. Whereas
our earlier, more empirical, observations suggested
scatter and lack of depth, in this case, the subjective
observation demonstrates a fairly well-grounded
domain. These authors, even those on the cutting
edge, consider their intellectual roots carefully, and
inculcate the values of their predecessors.
3.0 Conclusion: ISKO 10s Bookshelf
ISKO 2008s bookshelf looks a little like the photograph in Figure 2.
The distribution of resources relied upon by the
conference authors is post-millenial for sure, with
most citations to works within the last few years. A
science that is growing is rapidly cumulative, and a
good indicator of that is currency of cited research.
The breadth of the conference domain is impressive,
and it shows the wide range of research being carried
out in knowledge organization around the world today. The relatively heavy reliance on monographs is a
sign of the influence of humanistic thoughtlikely
rooted in the strong connection between philosophy
and concepts of ontology. We saw that echoed in the
author co-citation analysis as well, where each of the
clusters includes a network of prominent scholars

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


R. P. Smiraglia. ISKO 10s Bookshelf. An Editorial

191

Figure 2. ISKO 10s Bookshelf

joined together with prolific newcomers and rooted


in classical (for the domain) philosophical points of
view. The relative youth of the domain, as well as its
attention to currency, is reflected in the proportions
of resources found in proceedings, Festschrifts, and
thematic anthologies. It would be interesting to
know how many papers that appear in ISKO international conference proceedings eventually form the
basis of formal papers in peer-reviewed journals.
It is important to bear in mind that we are looking
at a snapshot of a single point on a continuum. Knowledge organization has a very long history, even given
the relative youth of ISKO, and is likely to have a long
future as well. What we see here is just one moment in
the life of knowledge organization. It suggests relative
health for the larger domain, and it also suggests the
need for more integral analysis of the domain
perhaps the collective use of more of Hjrlands 11
pointsto monitor our progress as a science.

References
Arsenault, Clment, and Tennis, Joseph, eds. 2008.
Culture and identity in knowledge organization:
Proceedings of the 10th International ISKO Conference, Montral, 5-8 August 2008. Advances in
knowledge organization 11. Wrzburg: Ergon
Verlag.
Hjrland, Birger. 2002. Domain analysis in information science: eleven approaches traditional as
well as innovative. Journal of documentation 58:
422-62.
Lise, Cynthia, Larivire, Vincent, and Archambault,
ric. 2008. Conference proceedings as a source of
scientific information: a bibliometric analysis.
Journal of the American Society for Information
Science and Technology 59: 1776-84.
White, Howard D. 2003. Authors as citers over time.
Journal of the American Society for Information
Science and Technology 52: 87-108.

192

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


C. Minter. Liberating the Responsibility to Think for Oneself: The Warburg Institute Library Classification

Liberating the Responsibility to Think for Oneself:


The Warburg Institute Library Classification
Catherine Minter
University of Cambridge, Modern & Medieval Languages Library, Sidgwick Avenue,
Cambridge, United Kingdom, CB3 9DA, <cjm91@cam.ac.uk>

After completing a PhD in eighteenth-century German literature and intellectual history at the University of Oxford, Catherine Minter trained as a librarian at the Warburg Institute Library in London,
becoming qualified in June 2007. In March 2007, she took up her current post of Assistant Librarian
with special responsibility for Germanic languages at the Modern and Medieval Languages Faculty Library of the University of Cambridge.

Minter, Catherine. Liberating the Responsibility to Think for Oneself: The Warburg Institute Library Classification. Knowledge Organization, 35(4), 192-208. 40 references.
Abstract: The unique classification of the library of the Warburg Institute in London is the subject of this article, with regard
to the implications for the organization of knowledge in this library. To emphasize its underlying pedagogic ethos, which played an important role in shaping the classifications structure, the classification is analyzd in its appropriate library-historical
context. The development of the classification in the early 1920s, the arrangement of the stock over four floors, and the classifications structure of and within classes; are related to the implications of this structure for the organization of knowledge in
the library. Finally, discussion of the classifications structure and its implications is combined with discussion of its pedagogic
mission with the aim of establishing how the classification and shelf arrangement are intended to have impact upon users of
the library.

1. Introduction
The Warburg Institute Library, which has its origins
in the collection of the Hamburg private scholar
Aby Warburg (1866-1929), is a research library specializing in the history of the classical tradition. In
1933, the library was transferred to London to escape the National Socialist regime; it has been part of
the University of London since 1944. The library has
a unique system of classification which was developed in the early 1920s and survives to the present
day; this classification is the subject of this article.
Review of the secondary literature on the Warburg
Institute Library in Section 2 highlights gaps in research. In Section 3, an attempt is made to place the
Warburg classification in its appropriate libraryhistorical context in order to elucidate its underlying
pedagogic ethos; awareness of the pedagogic principles informing the classification will be seen to be
necessary to an appreciation of its overall achievement. Section 4 charts the development of the classification in the early 1920s and discusses the ar-

rangement of the stock over four thematically distinct floors with the aim of advancing on the findings of recent commentators writing on Warburgs
library and its organization. In Section 5, the classifications structure is examined with reference to the
order of and within classes, and the implications of
this structure for our understanding of the organization of knowledge in the library are explored. In
conclusion, consideration is given to the relationship
between the implications of the classifications structure and its pedagogic mission as described in Section 3.
It is generally accepted that the arrangement of
books in the Warburg Institute Library closely reflects the ideas of the librarys founder (see e.g. Yates
2002, xiv). Although detailed consideration of Aby
Warburgs ideas does not lie within the scope of this
article, it is hoped that an enhanced appreciation of
the Warburg Institute Library classifications significance will complement research carried out in other
disciplines on Warburgs contribution as an intellectual historian.

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


C. Minter. Liberating the Responsibility to Think for Oneself: the Warburg Institute Library Classification

2. Literature review
The first significant English-language source on the
Warburg Institute Library was Gertrud Bings article
The Warburg Institute (1934), which remains one
of the most authoritative contributions on the library and its organization. Bing, who joined the library in 1921, was intimately involved in the development of the classification during the 1920s. In her
1934 article, she in effect introduces the library to an
English audience, discussing its beginnings, ethos,
arrangement andbrieflyits classification. Bings
article was followed in May 1935 by Edgar Winds
The Warburg Institute Classification Schemea
detailed, albeit succinct, account of the method of
classification and system of notation adopted in the
Warburg Institute Library. Wind, who himself classified large sections of the library, explains the principles that lie behind the stages of division in the classification: within each main class, the first stage of
division follows one of three lines (branch of subject, period or country); the second then specifies
the first along the remaining two lines (so, for example, if a class is first subdivided by country, it will
be further subdivided by period and branch of subject) (1935, 193). This model is not applied systematically throughout the classification, but it nevertheless provides a key to an understanding of the order within classes.
The final important early source on the Warburg
Institute Library is Fritz Saxls History of Warburgs Library, which was originally written around
1943, but published only in 1970 in E. H.
Gombrichs Aby Warburg: An Intellectual Biography.
Saxls involvement with the library began in 1914
and ended with his death in 1948; perhaps more than
any other individual, he was instrumental in giving
the Institute and its library the shape they now possess. Accordingly, his History of Warburgs Library is first and foremost a study of the development of the libraryin particular its institutionalization. It is also, however, one of the best accounts we
have of the ethos underlying the librarys arrangement and system of classification, and as such will be
frequently referred to in this article.
These early sources in many ways remain unsurpassed by more recent contributions. Originally published in Italian in 1985, Salvatore Settiss article
Warburg continuatus explores aspects of the librarys organization over the three phases of its existence: Hamburg, pre-1933; London, in temporary accommodation, between 1934 and 1958; London, in its

193

permanent accommodation, from 1958 to the present


day. Particular attention is paid to the method of distributing the stock over four floors, subsequently
named Image, Word, Orientation and Action,
which was introduced in 1926 when the library
moved to new premises in Hamburg. Settis posits
three stages in the development of this arrangement:
Floor
4
3
2
1

Hamburg,
1926
Action
Word
Image
Orientation

London,
1934
Action
Image
Word
Orientation

London,
1958
Action
Orientation
Word
Image

Table 1. Settiss model of the Warburg Institute Librarys


four-floor arrangment (1996, 147)

This model is not, however, definitive, as will be


shown in Section 4.2.
The main focus of Tilmann von Stockhausens
Kulturwissenschaftliche Bibliothek Warburg is the architecture of the Hamburg building that was home
to the library between 1926 and 1933. However, he
also discusses the organization of the library during
these years, drawing on a range of important and in
part previously unpublished archival sources. Particular attention is paid to the method adopted in the
early 1920s (but subsequently abandoned) of using
colours as a system of notation, and to the four-floor
arrangement explored by Settis. Stockhausen challenges Settiss model as shown above, drawing attention to the unreliability of early reports of the arrangement (1992, 86-87). He also warns against
over-emphasizing the importance of the four-floor
system at the cost of other aspects of the classification such as the order within classeswithout himself embarking on a detailed discussion of these
other aspects.
At first sight, it seems that Stockhausens call for
a study of the Warburg Institute Library classification that advances beyond consideration of its basic
features might be satisfied by the article Chaos or
order? by Mari Friman, Pivi Jansson and Vesa
Suominen: Ours is the first major study on the classification of the Warburg Institute Library together
with a presentation of Aby Warburgs life as a
scholar and a history of his library. (1995, 23) After
a brief account of Warburgs activity as a scholar and
book-collector and an outline of practical aspects of
the classification (mostly borrowed from Wind), the
authors move on to a discussion of the classification
from a more theoretical perspective. Their conclu-

194

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


C. Minter. Liberating the Responsibility to Think for Oneself: The Warburg Institute Library Classification

sion is that the principle underlying the classification


is one of association. The resultant observation that
the Warburg classification possesses a shallow hierarchical structure, linking topics in an associative way
at the same stage of division (Friman et al. 1995, 28)
is a sound one; equally, the observation that the classification was developed with browsing in mind
(1995, 29) is correct. As conclusions, however, these
remarks are somewhat meagre; moreover, the reader
senses that the authors are disappointed by their
own conclusions, having approached their study
with the expectation of finding a more systematic
classification.
The most recent secondary source on the Warburg
Institute Library is a German-language monograph:
Hans-Michael Schfers Kulturwissenschaftliche Bibliothek Warburg (2003), which presents itself as a
study of the library from a library history perspective. In the first two chapters, the author attempts to
place the library in its appropriate social and cultural
contexta potentially significant undertaking. Disappointingly, this endeavour is hampered by a tendency to dwell on historical minutiae and political
and economic aspects of German library history that
are not immediately relevant to the Warburg Institute Library, and which therefore prevent a clear picture from emerging of the appropriate background
context to the librarys formation and development.
The brief discussion of the librarys classification
scheme in this study is largely derivative: Schfer
merely revisits the ground covered by Stockhausen,
and shies away from theoretical discussion of the
empirical data (2003, 220-33).
Review of the major secondary sources on the
Warburg Institute Library thus reveals significant
gaps in research. Where sources have focused on the
classification at all, discussion has tended to gravitate
around its most fundamental elements: notably, the
use of colours as a system of notation and the
method of distributing the books over four floors.
Important as these elements are, other features of
the scheme such as the order of and within classes
also merit examination. Where an attempt has been
made to study the classification in more detailin
the article by Friman, Jansson and Suominenthe
results have been disappointing owing to an inappropriate line of approach: the Warburg Institute Library classification is an inherently unsystematic
classification which inevitably does not fare well
when normative standards of order or chaos are
applied to it. Arguably, a more profitable approach
to the classification is to take its unsystematic char-

acter as a given and to explore its significance and


implications. This article is intended as a contribution in this direction.
3. The historical and intellectual context to the
Warburg Institute Library classification
The following section aims to place the Warburg Institute Library and its system of classification in
their appropriate historical and intellectual context
in order to elucidate the pedagogic ethos underlying
the method of arranging books in this library.
Awareness of the pedagogic mission behind the
classification will ultimately be seen to be necessary
to an appreciation of its structure and overall
achievement.
3.1. The origins of Warburgs library
In his History of Warburgs Library, Fritz Saxl
traces Warburgs idea of founding a library back to
his experience of the seminar libraries in Strasbourg
while he was a student there (1970, 326):
At that time the seminar building at Strasbourg
consisted of a number of cells containing specialized libraries and the student was given
freedom to use them all. Warburg went from
one of these seminar libraries to another, pursuing his clues from art to religion, from religion to literature, from literature to philosophy.
To give the student a library uniting the various
branches of the history of human civilization
where he could wander from shelf to shelf was
his resolve.
Strasbourg, Warburgs source of inspiration, was in
fact the first German university to offer its students
a comprehensive model of seminar or institute instruction; it served as a model for many other institutions (Dziatzko 1893, 38). The majority of Germanys academic seminars and institutes were
formed between 1870 and 1900. Their expansion was
rapid: in a report from 1909, one commentator relates that in my student days, the Philological
Seminar in Bonn only had nine members. Nowadays, things are quite different. In Leipzig, we have a
range of seminars, each of which has well in excess of
a hundred members [So erinnere ich mich aus
meiner Studentenzeit, da im Bonner philologischen
Seminar nur 9 Mitgliederstellen bestanden. Das ist
heute ganz anders. Wir haben in Leipzig eine Reihe

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


C. Minter. Liberating the Responsibility to Think for Oneself: the Warburg Institute Library Classification

von Seminaren, deren jedes weit ber hundert Mitglieder zhlt.] (Bcher 1912, 153-54). The seminar libraries quickly grew into serious rivals to the
university libraries: in Fritz Milkaus Handbuch der
Bibliothekswissenschaft, it is estimated that, by
1926/27, Germanys seminar and institute libraries
held a total of approximately five million volumes
and the university libraries approximately 13.5 million (1933, 538).
Among those writing on the topic, the origins of
seminar/institute instruction in Germany were seen
to reside in a shift in teaching methods which took
place in the nineteenth century away from a dogmatic
style characterized by the use of lectures and the
ethos of delivering knowledge up to students towards
an heuristic approach intended to instruct students in
research methods (see e.g. Milkau 1933, 525; Bcher
1912, 153). This shift was identified with a development towards a new, workshop type of university
driven by a climate of practical, active research rather
than by magisterial theoretical teaching (Milkau 1933,
525). Accordingly, the purpose of the seminar/institute libraries was to place all the relevant
academic literature at students disposal in order to
encourage independent study and research. The core
of the seminar libraries collections was what we
would nowadays call prescribed texts, together with
reference works and the most important academic
journals in their respective disciplines. Almost without exception, these were reference collections, not
least because they were intended to counteract a
problem frequently faced by users of the university
libraries, which were generally lending libraries
namely, that the required books were unavailable because already out on loan (Milkau 1933, 528).
Importantly in the present context, the seminar/institute libraries wereagain almost without
exceptionlibraries which allowed their users free
access to the shelves. The practical advantage of this
was quick and convenient access to the required literature: Every need for further information that
arises in the course of their [the students] studies
can be satisfied on the spot; every quotation can be
looked up immediately. And the same book that
serves one student one minute is available to another
the minute after [Jeder im Verlaufe ihrer Arbeit
entstehende Bedarf nach weiterer Information kann
auf der Stelle befriedigt, jedes Zitat sofort nachgeschlagen werden. Und dasselbe Buch, das in dieser
Minute dem einen gedient hat, kann in der nchsten
fr einen anderen verfgbar sein.] (Bcher 1912,
165). The open access system was also seen to con-

195

tain an important intellectual advantage: the easy familiarity with the literature on a subject that only
immediate access to the relevant books and active,
informal use of them can provide (Leyh 1957, 410).
In addition to allowing their students free access to
the shelves, the seminar/institute libraries placed
emphasis on providing a congenial working environment: in the Philological Seminar and Germanic
Institute in Leipzig, for example, separate work
spaces were set aside for smokers and non-smokers
(Milkau 1933, 539). These libraries also on the whole
aimed to have longer opening hours than the university libraries.
In sum, all of these elementsthe open access
policy, the provision of a congenial working environment, the liberal conditions of usewere intended to encourage students to regard the seminar
and institute libraries as a sort of home from home
and to derive intellectual benefit from this relaxed
relationship with the academic institution. This is
also an accurate description of the role of the Warburg Institute Library as conceived by its founder
and sustained up to the present day. In an unpublished report from February 1934, it is stated that
the librarys mission is to get into our own rooms
every book a student requires and that we want to
extend our opening hours as far as possible so that
the student shall not find himself restricted in his
work (WIA, Ia.2.1.1, [4]); users of the Warburg Institute Library as it exists today will appreciate just
how much of this early spirit has been preserved.
3.2. Open access and shelf arrangement: the Warburg
Institute Library
Describing the nature of Warburgs library in a paper
from 1921/22, Saxl terms it a Problembibliothek
(1923, 9), by which he means that it focuses on a
specific problem, which he identifies in this same paper as the question of the extent and nature of the influence of antiquity on modern cultures [die Frage
nach Ausbreitung und Wesen des Einflusses der Antike
auf die nachantiken Kulturen] (1923, 1). The librarys problem, he continues, was posed by Warburg, who, however, recognized that the scope of the
problem was too broad for an individual to be able to
solve it, and who thus intended his library as a set of
tools that future scholars might use to draw closer
to a solution (Saxl 1923, 9-10). This idea of the library as a tool (or instrument) reverberates
through the earliest accounts of its purpose. For example, in the Bericht ber die Bibliothek Warburg

196

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


C. Minter. Liberating the Responsibility to Think for Oneself: The Warburg Institute Library Classification

und ihre Entwicklung zu einem ffentlichen Forschungsinstitut, Saxl remarks on the librarys dual
function as Warburgs personal research tool and as a
publicly accessible research instrument ([1921],
117-18). In an entry from the library journal dated 3
May 1927, Warburg reminds his colleagues that until we have transferred the classmarks [to the catalogue], the library will remain a paltry tool; only after that will we be nimble. So all hands on deck!
[Vor Uebertragung der Signaturen bleibt die K.B.W.
ein kmmerliches Werkzeug; ist [sic] nachher sind
wir wendig! Also alle Mann auf Deck!] (Warburg
2001, 87).
The conception of the library as a research tool or
instrument is based on an ideal of active use. Users
should be allowed direct access to the shelves: The
student will only properly use the library when he is
able to go straight to the shelves and learns to grasp
the interconnections between problems by the manner of arrangement. No amount of borrowing from
the library can possibly give him the same understanding of its intellectual universe [In rechter
Weise wird ferner der Student erst dann die Bibliothek benutzen, wenn er selbst an die Schrnke herangeht und so schon durch die Art der Aufstellung
die Zusammenhnge der Probleme erfassen lernt.
Durch keinen noch so intensiven Leihverkehr mit
der Bibliothek knnte er in deren Gedankenwelt
eindringen.] (Saxl [1921], 121). As this passage
suggests, the librarys open access system gains its
meaning from the fact that the shelf arrangement is
intended to serve an instructive function. Similarly,
in her article The Warburg Institute, Gertrud Bing
writes (1934, 7):
The educational influence of a library which invites a student to adopt a special subject and
method of research can only be effective if he is
allowed to be guided by the books themselves.
The scholar who is expected to penetrate into
the borderlands of his special subject must find
the new territory ready surveyed for him by the
able planning of an expert.
In what ways, then, was the shelf arrangement in the
Warburg Institute Library meant to be instructive?
Firstly, the librarys open shelves were intended to
give users an overview of the literature on a topic or,
in the words of J. B. Trapp, to serve as selective
running bibliographies (1984, 198). The corollary
of this aim was the ambition to collect as broadly as
possible, avoiding narrow specialization. More im-

portantly, however, the shelf arrangement in Warburgs library was from the first intended to draw attention to interconnections between different areas
of knowledge. This is clearly expressed in the unpublished report from February 1934, where it is stated
that the collection was put together with the special
view to showing the inter-dependence of the different fields of research (WIA, Ia.2.1.1, [4]).
The librarys commitment to open access was
thus underpinned by pedagogic considerations. It is,
however, worth pausing at this point to note that it
has not always beenor been able to bean open
access library. Notably, between 1926 and 1933,
when Saxl and Bing were transforming it into a public institution in Hamburg, the stacks were not accessible to readers; one possible explanation for this
is that the organization of the library at this time was
not deemed efficient enough to merit an open access
system. It was only in 1934, when the library took
up residence in its first London home, Thames
House, that the stack room was opened up to readerswith supervision from the porter (Bing 1934,
4). In July 1937, the library moved to the Imperial
Institute Buildings at South Kensington, but the
stock was not unpacked until January 1939. Later the
same year, the library was evacuated at the request of
the University of London (Bing 1998, 23); it was not
until the beginning of 1946 that the books were reassembled on the open shelves (Warburg Institute
1946, 2). The shelf arrangement at this time was not
felt to be ideal: It proved impossible to keep to the
pre-war arrangement of shelving, and a new system
had to be worked out which is far from ideal but as
satisfactory as present conditions of space permit
(Warburg Institute 1946, 2). In fact, it was only in
1958, when the library moved to new, purpose-built
premises in Woburn Square, Bloomsbury, that the
desired combination of open access and an ideal shelf
arrangement could be achieved.
3.3. Open access and shelf arrangement:
the broader context
Saxl, in his History of Warburgs Library, situates
the librarys commitment to open access and a meaningful shelf arrangement in the context of a broader
nineteenth- and early twentieth-century debate on
library classification. The passage in question is
worth quoting in full (Saxl 1970, 327):
Those were the decades when in many libraries,
big and small, the old systematic arrangements

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


C. Minter. Liberating the Responsibility to Think for Oneself: the Warburg Institute Library Classification

were thrown overboard since the old categories


no longer corresponded to the requirements of
the new age. The tendency was to arrange the
books in a more practical way; standardization, alphabetical and arithmetical arrangements were favoured. The file cabinets of the
systematic catalogue became the main guide to
the student; access to the shelves and to the
books themselves became very rare. Most libraries, even those which allowed the student
open access (as for instance Cambridge University Library), had to make concessions to
the machine age which increased book production from day to day and to give up grouping
the books in a strictly systematic order. The
book-title in the file catalogue replaced in most
cases that other and much more scholarly familiarity which is gained by browsing.
Saxl is here describing a development which, in
Germany, had received strong impetus from Martin
Schrettingers influential treatise on library science,
the Versuch eines vollstndigen Lehrbuches der Bibliothek-Wissenschaft. In this work, Schrettinger took a
surprisingly modern, practical view of the librarys
function, stressing the importance of fast finding
and accessibility of resources. To this end, he argued
against wholly systematic shelf arrangement, instead
advocating what Buzs (1986, 270) calls arrangement by open groups (the use of broad classes, with
arrangement in order of accession within these
classes) and emphasizing the value of catalogues as
finding tools. Although Schrettingers position was
challenged throughout the nineteenth century by authorities in the field of library science such as Ebert,
Molbech and Petzholdt, it had found numerous supporters by the turn of twentieth century. Perhaps the
most influential among these was Georg Leyh, who
dismissed systematic arrangement as unhelpful in the
context of academic libraries in an authoritative article from 1912, Das Dogma von der systematischen
Aufstellung.
The insistence on physical order as a mirror of
conceptual order in Warburgs library may, as Saxl
recognizes, thus be seen as anachronistic. However,
one context in which the issue of the physical arrangement of library stock continued to retain significance at the turn of the twentieth century was
that of the public library. In his 1912 article, Leyh
makes the point that systematic arrangement is only
meaningful in libraries whose physical layout is intended to serve an educational functionnamely, in

197

public libraries (1912, 251). And indeed, the educational benefits of systematic shelf order had been
discussed as part of a lively debate on open access in
public libraries which took place in Britain during
the 1890s. An 1899 pamphlet signed by twelve British public librarians and described by its authors as
the first [statement] to be publicly made by librarians having practical experience of safe-guarded open
access libraries (Account 1899, 5) sets out the reasons why systematic arrangement is particularly appropriate to open access libraries. The first reason
given is a practical one. In open access libraries, systematic arrangement, and the method of ordering
and marking books that it imposes, helps to prevent
misplacements (Account 1899, 3):
In safe-guarded open access libraries, where the
books are all closely and exactly classified by
subjects, and so marked by means of distinctive
labels as to clearly distinguish class from class,
subject from subject, and book from book,
misplacements are not only comparatively rare,
but readily detected and set right when they do
occur.
The second and more important reason is an intellectual one: open access and systematic arrangement
give the public a higher and more rational enjoyment of literature (Account 1899, 1). Systematic
shelf arrangement in open access public libraries
makes it possible for users to survey a librarys holdings in any given subject area, gain an overview of
the literature on a topic, and make intelligent, informed choices about what they want to borrow
based on examination and comparison of related
items. Furthermore, direct contact with the shelves
of a well-ordered library is seen to serve an instructive, pedagogic function per se: Access to properly
classified libraries is an education in itself (Account 1899, 6). In contrast, the library in which the
stock is not arranged systematically and in which, in
the emphatic words of James Duff Brown, the books
as they stand together on the shelves have no more
arrangement or relation to each other than have the
contents of a dust-bin (1898, 15) cannot help shape
the minds of its users.
The affinity between the pedagogic ethos underlying the Warburg Institute Library and that behind the
Anglo-American public library movement is an important one which has been overlooked in the secondary literature. In an entry from the library journal
from March 1928, Gertrud Bing draws a parallel be-

198

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


C. Minter. Liberating the Responsibility to Think for Oneself: The Warburg Institute Library Classification

tween the ideals of Warburgs library and those of the


American public library as depicted in a recent article
from the Zentralblatt fr Bibliothekswesen, one of the
leading German library journals of the time: Essay in
the Zentralblatt fr Bibliothekswesen on the position
of the public library in America, which accords the librarian the same missionary role as we have in our
minds as an ideal, is being photographed (for duplication) [Aufsatz im Zentralblatt fr BibliotheksWesen ber die Stellung der Public Library in
Amerika, der dem Bibliothekar ganz hnliche missionarische Aufgaben zuweist, wie sie uns als Ideal
vorschweben, wird photographiert (zur Vervielfltigung).] (Warburg 2001, 201). The article in question
is Adolf Jrgenss Die Stellung der Public Library im
Bildungswesen der Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika,
which appeared in the Zentralblatt fr Bibliothekswesen early in 1928. In this article, Jrgens contrasts the
German ideal of the library as a storehouse of books
and the librarian as keeper with the American ideal of
the (public) library as an information provider and
the librarian as mediator (1928, 26-29). He emphasizes the firmly pedagogic role of the American public library: The public library occupies a central role
in American life, educating and instructing. A
genuinely missionary spirit inspires the [public library] movement and its leaders [Erziehend und
belehrend steht so die Public Library mitten im
amerikanischen Leben. Es ist ein wahrhafter Missionsgeist, der die Bewegung und ihre Fhrer beseelt.] (Jrgens 1928, 25).
4. The Warburg Institute Library classification:
development and arrangement
The preceding section has suggested that the Warburg Institute Library, like the German seminar libraries of the late nineteenth century and the American and British public libraries of the time, was intended as a library that would facilitate access to
knowledge and influence the minds of its users. The
library was conceived as a tool or instrument
which should be used in an active, practical way, and
not as a storehouse of treasures. In order for it to
fulfil these roles, readers were to be allowed free access to the shelves. This would enable them to acquire the scholarly familiarity which is gained by
browsing (Saxl 1970, 327) and also, more importantly, to derive intellectual benefit from the shelf arrangement, which, as in the open access public libraries of the time, was shaped by strong pedagogic
intentions.

The importance attached to open access and


meaningful shelf order in Warburgs library is an indicator of the seriousness with which the business of
classification was undertaken when it was systematically carried out in the 1920s. The following section
looks in detail at the development of the Warburg
Institute Library classification between 1921 and
1926. Section 4.2 explores the physical arrangement
of the library, paying particular attention to the
method of distributing the stock over four thematically distinct floors which was introduced in 1926
and continues up to the present day.
4.1. The development of the classification, 1921-1926
In 1921, Warburg, who had suffered a mental breakdown, was forced to leave Hamburg for the sanatorium of Ludwig Binswanger in Kreuzlingen, Switzerland. His absencewhich looked like it might be
permanentgave rise to pressing questions about
his librarys future. Saxl, who was now in charge of
the library, was convinced that the way to secure its
existence was to develop it into a public institution.
In this, he was pursuing earlier impulses: as early as
1914, he and Warburg had debated how best to turn
the library into an institute (Saxl 1970, 329-30). Ultimately, the steps towards institutionalization taken
by Saxl were twofold: he invited scholars to lecture
and publish under the librarys auspices; andmore
importantly in the present contexthe made the library available to a larger public (Bing 1998, 9).
Until this time, the library had had a homely, personal feel to it; the task now was to transform it into
something more workmanlike and efficient which
could be used as an instrument by a wider public
(Bing 1998, 9). The arrangement of the books up until this point had reflected Warburgs system of
thought and had tended to shift in tandem with his
associations of ideas. If the library was to become an
institute, granting a substantial number of readers
free access to its shelves, a proper system for marking
and placing the books was essential. In 1921, Saxl in
collaboration with Bing thus set about inventing a
system of pressmarks which consisted of a combination of coloured paper strips on the spines with corresponding letters and numbers (Bing 1998, 10).
An indication of the main sections of the library in
the years leading up to this point is given by the Jahrestabellencoloured charts and graphs showing the
contents and growth of the library between 1886 and
1926currently kept in the Warburg Institute Archive. The charts for the years 1886-1917 show the fol-

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


C. Minter. Liberating the Responsibility to Think for Oneself: the Warburg Institute Library Classification

lowing sections: Festivals, History, Aesthetics, Philosophy, Cultural History, History of Literature, The
Art of the Book, Art History, Periodicals, Philology,
and Archaeology (see WIA, I.4.5.1I.4.5.6). Between
1911 and 1915, three further sections were added:
Natural History, The Occult and Astrology, and
Hamburgiana; History of Literature and Philology
were combined to form a single section. In 1916-17,
the main sections of the library were thus: Philosophy and Theology, Cultural History, Natural History, The Occult and Astrology, Literature and Philology, Festivals, The Art of the Book, History,
Aesthetics, Art History, Archaeology, Hamburgiana,
and Periodicals (WIA, I.4.5.9).
In 1921, Bing joined the library; and overhaul of its
main sections began. The accessions graph for 192122 reveals some significant changes in the organization of the library; its sections and subsections are
now as follows: Philosophy (General, History of Philosophy, Aesthetics, Philosophy of History); History
of Religion (Pre-Christian, ChristianityReformation, Reformation, Astrology, Magic); World History
(General, Antiquity and Middle Ages, Renaissance);
Art History (General, Archaeology, Middle Ages,
Renaissance); History of Science; Language and Literature; Folklore and Ethnology; History of Scholarship; History and Culture of the Orient; Hamburgiana; War and Politics; Periodicals (adapted from WIA,
I.4.5.10). History of Religion (formerly Theology)
has now branched off from Philosophy and embraces
what was previously called The Occult and Astrology.
Aesthetics is now a subsection within Philosophy,
and Archaeology a subsection within Art History.
Four entirely new sections have been added: Folklore
and Ethnology, which we can assume embraces the
earlier section Festivals; History of Scholarship,
which presumably includes the earlier section The
Art of the Book; History and Culture of the Orient;
and War and Politics. Generally, it is possible to discern an upgrading of the vocabulary used to describe
the collection: the main sections are now given
broader but more scientific designations than before;
and an attempt has been made to align the names of
the main sections in order to emphasize the collections historical component.
In 1921-22, Saxl and Bing not only overhauled the
librarys main sections; they also set about developing
their system of pressmarks. The Bericht ber die
Bibliothek Warburg fr das Jahr 1922the annual
report for 1922explains that two factors in particular determined the type of notation chosen: firstly,
the need for a flexible and expansible notation; and

199

secondly, the need for a system that would minimize


a problem posed by the librarys commitment to
open accessnamely, the problem of misplacements
(WIA, Ia.1.2.1, [4-5]). The notational system chosen
by Saxl and Bing was in the first instance a system of
colours. Three coloured labels were to be affixed to
the spine of each bookthe top colour indicating the
discipline, the middle the works methodological approach (e.g. texts, handbooks, historical studies),
and the bottom colour indicating branch of subject
(WIA, Ia.1.2.1, [6]). The decision to use colours as a
means of pressmarking the books proved an unwise
one in several respects. Practical problems soon
emerged: the coloured labels faded quickly, and easily
became detached from the books. Furthermore, although the use of colours as pressmarks represented
an effective means of preventing misplacements, it
was ill-suited to help readers locate materials: a combination of colours is not a memorable notation, and
it cannot easily be represented on a catalogue slip.
The decision was thus taken to use not only colours,
but also letters as notation; unfortunately, it is not
possible to glean from the primary sources precisely
when this occurred. We can, however, be confident
that the use of letters was in place by 1926: the Tagebuch der Kulturwissenschaftlichen Bibliothek Warburgthe library journal between 1926 and 1929
from its outset reports on ongoing efforts to transfer
classmarks to the card catalogue.
The final accessions graphfor the year 1926
shows that the sections and subsections of the library have remained substantially unchanged since
1921-22. However, War and Politics has now disappeared; and sections entitled Trade and Technology,
Bibliography, Music and Theatre, and Americana
have been added. The main sections (together with
their corresponding colours) are thus now: Philosophydark green; Religionlight green; World Historybrown; Art Historyred; History of Scienceyellow; Language and Literaturelight blue;
Folklore and Ethnologydark blue; History of
Scholarshippink; History and Culture of the Orientpurple; Trade and Technologyblack; Hamburgianalight brown; Bibliographypink; Music
and Theatrelight green; Americanalight blue
(adapted from WIA, I.4.5.13).
4.2. Physical arrangement
1926 was a critical year for the Warburg Institute Library, for this was when it moved to new premises in
Hamburg. In his report on the years activity, Saxl

200

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


C. Minter. Liberating the Responsibility to Think for Oneself: The Warburg Institute Library Classification

remarks that, beneficial as the move has been, it has


also highlighted the chaos caused by the poor working conditions in the old house, and how much
work remains to be done if the library is to become
the useful instrument we hope to turn it into [
welche Verwirrung durch die schlechten Arbeitsmglichkeiten im alten Haus angerichtet war und
wie viel Arbeit noch zu leisten wre, sollte die Bibliothek zu dem ntzlichen Instrument werden, zu
dem wir sie machen zu knnen hoffen.] (WIA,
Ia.1.6.1, [2]). It was with the move in 1926 that the
system of distributing the stock over four thematically distinct floors was introduced. Looking back
on the events of 1926 in his History of Warburgs
Library, Saxl gives the following account of the original four-floor arrangement (1970, 334):
The books were housed on four floors. The
first began with books on the general problems
of expression and on the nature of symbols.
From here one was led to anthropology and religion and from religion to philosophy and the
history of science. The second floor contained
books on expression in art, its theory and history. The third was devoted to language and literature, and the fourth to the social forms of
human lifehistory, law, folklore, and so forth.
However, as Stockhausen (1992, 86) highlights, the
reliability of this account is open to question given
that it conflicts with information given, again by
Saxl, in his Bericht ber die bersiedlung der Bibliothek Warburg aus dem Hause Heilwigstrae 114
in den Neubau Heilwigstrae 116, where the implied order is: first floorfine arts; second floor
religion, philosophy and science; third floor
language and literature; fourth floorsocial forms
of human life (1926, 187). This latter account is
strongly supported by evidence from the (unpublished) annual report for 1926: The first floor contains everything related to the Image; the second Religion and Philosophy [Natural Sciences and History
of Scholarship]; the third Language and Literature;
the fourth Geography, [Transmission of Culture]
History and War [Das erste Geschoss enthlt alles
auf das Bild Bezgliche; das zweite Religion und Philosophie [Naturwissenschaften u. Bildungsgeschichte]; das dritte Sprache und Literatur; das vierte Geographie, [Verkehrswissenschaft] Geschichtswissenschaft und Krieg.] (WIA, Ia.1.6.1, [3]; MS annotations in Gertrud Bings hand).

In December 1933, the Warburg Institute Library


was transferred to London to escape the rising tide
of National Socialism. Between May 1934 and July
1937, it occupied rooms in Thames House, Westminster; between July 1937 and February 1958, it
was housed in the Imperial Institute Buildings at
South Kensington. The years in temporary accommodation were ones in which space considerations
necessarily took precedence over physical arrangement: the prime concern was how to fit the librarys
growing stock into the space available, rather than
how to arrange it in the ideal way. It was only in
1952, after additional space had been gained in the
Imperial Institute Buildings, that thoughts turned
again to the arrangement of the stock: the Annual
Report for this year relates that the attempt has
been made, as far as the layout and equipment of the
rooms permit, to re-shelve the Library in accordance
with its original scheme which had become obscured
by makeshifts imposed through lack of space (Warburg Institute 1952, 1). The new arrangement took
the following form:
Orientation by means of myth, magic
and logic
(Religion; Science; Philosophy):
The Word as the vehicle of expression
and tradition
(Literature; Transmission of classical
learning):
The Image as the vehicle of expression
and tradition
(Archaeology and Art):
The significant Act [Dromenon]
(Political and Social History):

Rooms 5 & 4

Room 3

Room 2

Room 1

Figure 1. The Warburg Institute Library arrangement, 1952


(Warburg Institute 1952, 1)

With the exception of the use of the terms Orientation, Word, Image and Dromenon (from the
Greek for rite), this model agrees with that described by Gertrud Bing in her article The Warburg Institute, where the librarys four main sections in the
order in which the reader encounters them in the
stack room are identified as: Religion, Natural Science and Philosophy; Language and Literature; Fine
Arts; and Social and Political Life (1934, 4-5).
In 1958, the library moved to its purpose-built
premises in Woburn Square, where it has remained to
the present day. The limitations on space imposed by
the temporary quarters were thus lifted, and renewed
consideration could be given to the ideal arrangement of the stock. This is spelt out in the Annual

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


C. Minter. Liberating the Responsibility to Think for Oneself: the Warburg Institute Library Classification

Report for 1957-58: As it is no longer necessary to


adapt it to existing and unsuitable rooms it has now
been possible to arrange the Library in the very way
in which it was conceived and first arranged by its
founder (Warburg Institute 1958, 6). The new arrangementover four floors, a Reading Room and
basementwas as follows:
Fourth floorAction:

Ground floor:

History
Social Patterns
Religion (Comparative,
Greco-Roman,
Christian, Eastern)
Magic and Science
Philosophy
Literature
Classical Studies
Archaeology
Art
Reading Room

Basement:

Periodicals

Third floorOrientation:

Second floorWord:
First floorImage:

Figure 2. The Warburg Institute Library arrangement, 1958


(Warburg Institute 1958, 6)

The 1958 arrangement restores the original fourfloor order in all but one particularthe transposition of Word and Orientation , as the following
synoptic representation of the three stages in the development of the arrangement makes clear:
Section/
Floor
4
3
2
1

Hamburg
1926-33
Action
Word
Orientation
Image

London
1934-58
Action
Image
Word
Orientation

London
1958Action
Orientation
Word
Image

Table 2. Revised model of the Warburg Institute Librarys


four-floor arrangement

With some minor adjustments, the arrangement of


1958 has been retained to the present day. Thus, the
first floorand now also part of the basementis
still devoted to everything related to the Image
(WIA, Ia.1.6.1, [3]): Pre-Classical and Classical Art
(Class K), including Classical Archaeology; and
Post-Classical and Modern Art (Class C), including
History of Art, Art Interpretation and Aesthetics,
Iconography, Art Collecting, Topography and Applied Arts. Floor 2 houses Language and Literature,
classical and modern (Class E), and works on the history of scholarship (Class N). Floor 3 is devoted to
Science (Class F), with emphasis on the history of
magic and natural sciences, Religion (Classes B and

201

G), with emphasis on the great historical religions,


and Philosophy (Class A), with emphasis on the history of philosophical ideas. Finally, Floor 4 is still
given over to the social forms of human life (Saxl
1970, 334): Political History (Class H); and Cultural
History (Class D), embracing Psychology, Anthropology, Music, Theatre, Festivals, Technology, Trade,
Law and Sociology.
5. The structure of the Warburg Institute Library
classification and its significance
Section 4 has examined practical aspects of the Warburg Institute Library classification: its early development; and the physical arrangement of the stock
over four floors. In the following section, the attempt is made to explore the classifications structure with the aim of establishing what this structure
seeks to convey to users of the library.
5.1. Order of classes
In the older secondary literature on the Warburg Institute Library, there was some discussion as to
whether the librarys four-floor arrangement might
be seen to reveal a particular view of the organization
of knowledge. One interpretation of the librarys arrangement which has enjoyed some influence is that
provided by Gertrud Bing in the Historical Note
to the second edition of the Catalog of the Warburg
Institute Library (Warburg Institute 1967, iii):
The library was to lead from the visual image
(Bild), as the first stage in mans awareness, to
language (Wort) and thence to religion, science
and philosophy, all of them products of mans
search for orientation (Orientierung) which influences his patterns of behaviour and his actions, the subject matter of history. Action, the
performance of rites (drmena), in its turn is
superseded by reflection which leads back to
linguistic formulation and the crystallization of
image symbols that complete the cycle.
This interpretation is an appealing one because it suggests an evolutionary order to the classifications
main sections which seems to accord well with some
of Warburgs own ideas on cultural progress. These
ideas find clear expression in the Lecture on Serpent
Ritual which Warburg delivered to an audience of
fellow psychiatric patients at the sanatorium in
Kreuzlingen on 25 April 1923. With reference to the

202

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


C. Minter. Liberating the Responsibility to Think for Oneself: The Warburg Institute Library Classification

snake cult of the Pueblo Indians, he here posits a development in symbolism from real and substantial
symbolism which appropriates by actual gestures
(e.g. the Pueblo Indians masked dances) to that
symbolism which exists in thought alonea system
of mythology (Warburg 1938-39, 291). He suggests
that this second type of symbolism is in turn superseded by scientific argument, which ultimately leads
to emancipation from the mythological view (Warburg 1938-39, 291). In Bings interpretation of the librarys four-floor system, it is possible to discern a
reflection of the model of cultural progress described
in this lecture: symbols and myths (Image and
Word) are supplanted by religious, scientific and
philosophical argument (Orientation), culminating
in a rational world view (Action).
Attractive as this interpretation is, it does, however, conflict with that given by J. B. Trapp, former
Librarian and Director of the Warburg Institute, in
his publications on the library. In his article The
Warburg Institute, Trapp suggests that in order to
understand the arrangement of the library as Warburg intended it, the student should progress
through it in the opposite direction from that proposed by Bing in the Historical Note (1961, 745):
The library was to be arranged in such a way
that the student of the activities of man would
be led from the science of man as an individual
(psychology) through the first main division.
This was called drmenon (action, the performance of rites) and dealt with mankinds patterns of behaviourfolklore, anthropology, festivals, music, the theatre and, finally, political
theoryand his actions, the subject matter of
ancient and modern history. Thence the reader
passed [onto?] the second division of the library, comprising the history of religion, science
and philosophy, all of them products of mans
search for orientation (Orientierung). The two
last main divisions were devoted to mans expression of himself in language and literature
(Wort) and art and archaeology (Bild).
In a later article, Trapp describes the librarys arrangement in terms in which the idea of evolutionary
cultural development is even less conspicuous; once
again, he begins his description with the top floor
(1986, 173):
The first main division of the Library comprises
history and patterns of social behaviour; the se-

cond was named by Warburg Orientation (Orientierung)the history of religion, of magic and
science, and of philosophy, the history of human responses to, human attempts to explain
and control the human condition, by appeal to
the divine or by human reasoning; the third was
called Words (Wort)classical, humanist and
vernacular, their preservation and transmission;
the fourth Images (Bild)classical, humanist
and vernacular also, how and why they were
created and copied, how they have survived, and
in what often unexpected forms.
Here, the librarys main sections are presented not as
successive stages in a developmental cultural process
which the user of the library may gain an insight into
by moving through the collection in a particular direction, but simply as approaches to a set of broadly
related intellectual problems.
Evidence presented in Section 3.2 lends support
to Trapps account of the organization of knowledge
in the Warburg Institute Library. There, it was
emphasized that Warburg himself reached no definitive answers to the questions he investigated, and
that he therefore envisaged his library as a tool or instrument that future scholars might use to draw closer to solutions. In view of this, it seems inappropriate to regard the library as one whose arrangement is intended to disclose a particular view of the
organization of knowledge. It better befits the explorative ethos behind the library to view its main
sections as different approaches to a set of questions,
all of which may be seen to relate to the broad problem of the classical tradition. Furthermore, the readiness with which whole sections of the library have
been moved to new positions over the years also
suggests that an overarching principle of order was
never intended. More importance has always been attached in this classification to the dynamic relationships between neighbouring subjects than to the establishment of a stable order of classes.
5.2. Order within classes
The fullest account of the order within classes in the
Warburg Institute Library classification is given by
Edgar Wind in his article The Warburg Institute
Classification Scheme, in which the significance of
each of the three letters that constitute a Warburg
classmark is elucidated. The first letter refers to the
most general division of subjects (Art, Religion,
etc.); the second specifies that general subject by

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


C. Minter. Liberating the Responsibility to Think for Oneself: the Warburg Institute Library Classification

using either systematic or historical differentiations


(Wind 1935, 193). The systematic line leads to subdivisions by subject (e.g. to Sculpture within Art) and
the historical to subdivisions by period or country;
the second letter can thus mean (branch of) subject,
period or country. The meaning of the third letter
depends on that of the second or, to use Winds rather cumbersome terminology, is a specification of
that meaning along the two remaining lines (1935,
193). If the second letter indicates subject, the third
will indicate period and country; if it indicates period,
the third will indicate country and branch of subject;
finally, if the second letter indicates country, the third
will indicate period and branch of subject.
Class C, Post-Classical and Modern Art, is the
class within which Winds model is applied most systematically throughout, perhaps because he himself
worked intensively on the reclassification of this section of the library during the 1920s (Warburg 2001,
233). Elsewhere, anomalies abound, particularly at
the second stage of division. Within subclass DP, Political Theory, for example, we find the following order in array: General; Antiquity; Middle Ages; Renaissance; Italy; Spain; France; Low Countries; England; Germany; Russia; The Ideal Ruler; Utopias.
This subclass is thus subdivided first by period, then
by country, and then by branch of subjectall at the
same stage of division. Similarly, DE, Theatre, is
subdivided in the first instance by subject (Psychology of the Theatre), then by period (Primitive and
Oriental, Classical, Medieval), and finally by country. These exampleswhich could be extended
show that the Warburg Institute Library classification repeatedly violates one of the cardinal principles
of bibliographic classification: in order to avoid
cross-classification, a class should be subdivided
consistently by one characteristic only at the same
stage of division (Sayers 1967, 46). Close study of
the classification reveals that the risk of crossclassification is a persistent one in this scheme.
Rather than subdivide classes hierarchically or vertically into discrete, mutually exclusive units, preference is consistently given to juxtaposition at the
same stage of divisionon the horizontal axisof
potentially overlapping subclasses.
The price paid for the shallow hierarchical structure of the classification is, then, the risk of crossclassification. At the same time, however, it is precisely its shallow hierarchical structure and tendency
to juxtapose related subjects at the same stage of division which give the Warburg classification its
unique significance, as the rest of this section aims to

203

show with reference to specific examples. The following discussion draws on the Catalog of the Warburg Institute Library (second edition, 1967), which
represents the first authoritative statement of the
classification and shows it in the form in which it has
by and large remained up to the present day. References to the major bibliographic classification
schemes which have passed through several editions
are taken principally from earlier significant editions
(wherever possible, contemporaneous with the Catalog) because these capture an earlier state of knowledge; where relevant, however, reference has also
been made to the current editions of these schemes.
In Section 3.2, it was established that one of the
main aims of the Warburg classification has always
been to make interconnections between different areas of knowledge visible. A particularly good illustration of this aspect of the scheme is furnished by the
classification of Class F, History of Science, which is
divided into the following subclasses: Natural Sciences (FF); Magic (FB); Magical Objects (FC); Sorcery, Freemasonry and Rosicrucianism (FD); Zoology, Botany and Pharmacy (FO); Alchemy and
Chemistry (FG); History of Medicine (FE); Mathematics (FN); Divination (FM); Prophecy (FH); Astrology and Astronomy (FA); Cosmology (FI); and
Geography (FP). The most remarkable feature of this
section of the classification is the connections which
it establishes between the enlightened, sophisticated sphere of science and the unenlightened,
primitive realm of magicconnections suggestive
of a pre-Enlightenment world view within which science and magic were not yet polarized. Not only,
however, does this section of the classification suggest interconnections between subjects which intellectual historians have come to regard as distinctly
separate; it also posits a parity or equality between
these subjects by placing them on the same horizontal axis.
The uniqueness of the classifications treatment of
the History of Science emerges clearly when we
compare the treatment of subjects such as magic and
divination in other bibliographic classification schemes. A particularly illustrative counterexample is
furnished by Browns Subject Classification, which
places Divination, Prophecies and Sorcery under
Folklore and Occult Science (within Religion);
neighbouring subjects are Demonology and Witchcraft, Fairies, Monsters, Dragons, Unicorns, Werewolves and Phantom Ships, all of which clearly belong in the realm of superstition rather than science.
We find similar, if less extreme, arrangements in the

204

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


C. Minter. Liberating the Responsibility to Think for Oneself: The Warburg Institute Library Classification

major schemes. The sixteenth edition of DDC


(1958) places Divination and Astrology under Occult Sciences (within Philosophy) together with Apparitions, Hallucinations, Witchcraft, Palmistry,
Charlatanry, Telepathy and Spiritualism; the most recent edition retains much the same subject arrangement, now under the heading Parapsychology and
Occultism. Right up to the present day, LC similarly
classes Magic and Astrology as Occult Sciences
(within Psychology) alongside Ghosts, Demonology,
Witchcraft, Seers and Fortune-Telling. The first edition of Blisss Bibliographic Classification, notwithstanding the flexibility afforded by the provision
of alternative locations, offers fundamentally conventional subject groupings within Pseudopsychology, which concentrates on clairvoyance and divination, and within Folklore, which deals with magical
and superstitious beliefs and traditions.
All of these schemes, then, relegate subjects such
as magic and divination to the realm of superstition.
They do this in the first place by bringing these subjects into proximity with others which implicitly
discredit them (such as fairies, apparitions and charlatanry). Furthermore, they achieve the same end
through their hierarchies. In DDC16, for example,
Occult Sciences occupy a position at the end or bottom of the Philosophy Class after Physiological and
Abnormal Psychology, which follow Psychology and
Pseudopsychology, which in turn come after Metaphysics and branches thereof; the more abstract,
theoretical and rational aspects of the discipline
thus precede the more physical, non-rational ones.
Similarly, in LC, Occult Sciences are placed within
Psychology after the cognitive (Consciousness, Cognition), affective (Affection, Feeling, Emotion) and
applied (Applied Psychology; Developmental Psychology) aspects of the subject.
The eschewal of conventional classificatory hierarchies is one of the most remarkable features of the
Warburg Institute Library classification. Following
on from the above, we may take the classification of
Psychology as a first example of this tendency. The
majority of bibliographic classification schemes class
Psychology under Philosophy, thereby underscoring
its rational, mental component. They also tend to
adopt an Aristotelian, mental faculty-based approach
andas was noted aboveto progress from the higher, rational aspects of the discipline to the lower,
non-rational ones. The Warburg classification, however, places Psychology (DA) at the beginning of
Social Patterns (later Cultural History) and subdivides it in the following way:

General
Textbooks
History of Psychology
Experimental Psychology
Gestalt Psychology
Apperception
Sense Perception
Imagination
Emotion and Will
Memory
Symbol
Subconscious: Dreams
Animal Psychology
Child Psychology
Psychopathology
Psychoanalysis
Schizophrenia
Character
Psychology of Genius
Temperaments
Physiognomy and Gestures
Graphology
Physiognomy in Art

DAF

DAD

DAA
DAN
DAC

Figure 3. The classification of Psychology (DA)

Although it may be possible to discern hints of a conventional treatment here (in the faculty-based approach within Apperception; in the movement downwards from Apperception to Psychopathology), these are strongly counterbalanced by the emphasis that
is placed throughout on non-rational psychology
the psychology of the lower mental faculties and abnormal psychologywhich represents a significant
departure from classificatory tradition.
Another good example of the Warburg Institute
Library classifications non-normative approach to
the organization of knowledge is furnished by the
classification of Post-Classical and Modern Art
(Class C), which is divided into the following subclasses: General; Topography; Iconography; Survival
of Ancient Art; Early Christian Art; Illuminated Manuscripts; Italian, Spanish etc. Art (arranged by country); Applied Arts; Modern Art. The analogous classes within DDC16 and early editions of LC (taken
from the 1942 Outline) are subdivided as follows:
700
710
720
730
740

The arts
Landscape and
civic art
Architecture
Sculpture

N
N

Fine arts
General

NA
NB

Drawing and
decorative arts

NC

Architecture
Sculpture and
related arts
Graphic arts in
general;
Drawing and design;
Illustration

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


C. Minter. Liberating the Responsibility to Think for Oneself: the Warburg Institute Library Classification

750
760
770
780
790

Painting
Prints and
print making
Photography
Music
Recreation

ND
NE

Painting
Engraving; Prints

NK

Art applied to
industry;
Decoration and
ornament
DcD

Figure 4. The classification of the arts in DDC16 and early


editions of LC

As this illustrates, DDC and LC broadly speaking


adopt the same structure, beginning with the useful arts and moving thence to those which have
pleasure rather than usefulness as their end; this sequence simultaneously runs from those arts which
imitate nature most closely through to the least imitative. The system of the arts within the Warburg Institute Library classification is confined to the visual
arts (in keeping with the image-centred focus of
this part of the library); and the approach is topicbased and geographical. The classification hereby
avoids separating the arts into the discrete classes of
architecture, sculpture and painting or implying an
hierarchical order of precedence.
6. Conclusion: the mission of the classification
and shelf arrangement
Section 3 highlighted the importance attached to the
pedagogic function of the shelf arrangement in the
Warburg Institute Library, anchoring this in the context of a debate over open access in libraries at the
turn of the twentieth century. In conclusion, it is appropriate to return to the question of just how the
Warburg classification and shelf arrangement are intended to impact on users of the library.
In Section 5.1, it was suggested that the absence
of an overarching principle of order in the Warburg
classification befits the explorative ethos behind the
library, whose main sections are best seen as approaches to a set of related intellectual problems rather
than, as some commentators have supposed, as reflections of stages in a process of evolutionary cultural development which the user of the library may
come to comprehend by moving through the collection in a particular direction. The discussion of the
order within classes in Section 5.2 emphasized two
aspects in particular of the classification: firstly, its

205

ability to establish interconnections and suggest


equality between subjects which other bibliographic
classification schemes separate and in some instances
discriminate against; and secondly, its eschewal of
conventional classificatory hierarchies.
These aspects of the Warburg Institute Library
classification were also accorded significance by those most intimately connected with the librarys development and organization. That the librarys physical
arrangement does not aim to impart a particular view
of the organization of knowledge to the user, but instead to train him or her in a certain method of
approaching intellectual problems is suggested by
Saxl in his Bericht ber die Bibliothek Warburg und
ihre Entwicklung zu einem ffentlichen Forschungsinstitut, in which he describes the librarys distinctive character in the following terms ([1921], 117):
Its [the librarys] significance rests above all on
its manner of arrangement. The arrangement
by problemsas conceived by Professor
Warburginevitably confronts the user with
the intellectual interconnections first perceived
by Warburg between questions which academe
has been accustomed to treat as separate, and it
enables him [the user] to get to the very
heart of intellectual problems, for Professor
Warburgs genius resided in his ability always to
see the part in terms of the whole.
[ihre Bedeutung beruht vor allem auf dem
Wie ihrer Zusammenstellung. Die von Professor Warburg erdachte Aufstellung nach Problemen stt den Besucher mit Naturnotwendigkeit auf die vom Grnder zuerst gesehenen
geistigen Beziehungen zwischen bislang in der
Forschung noch getrennt behandelten Fragen,
und bringen ihn an das Wesentliche der wissenschaftlichen Probleme heran, da es Professor Warburg in genialer Weise verstanden hat,
jede Einzelfrage unter universalem Aspekt zu
sehen.]
As the user moves through the library, the revelation
of often unexpected links between diverse subjects
gives him or her a form of intellectual training: the
act of becoming accustomed to perceiving interconnections between diverse subjects promotes a mental
agility and open-mindedness that in turn constitute
the ability to forge innovative intellectual links.
Through experience of the Warburg Institute Library
classification and shelf arrangement, the user may

206

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


C. Minter. Liberating the Responsibility to Think for Oneself: The Warburg Institute Library Classification

thus acquire a facility akin to wit which can inject


the spirit of invention into scholarly research. Section 3.3 highlighted the affinity between the pedagogic ethos behind the open access public library at
the turn of the twentieth century and the Warburg
Institute Librarys original mission. It is now, however, possible to discern a subtle but important difference: whereas the early public libraries sought to
shape the minds of their users by their classifications
and shelf arrangements, the Warburg Institute Library has always attached more significance to training its users minds by its manner of arrangement.
The challenge issued by the Warburg classification
to conventional subject arrangements is emphasized
by Warburg in a note on the role of the library jotted
down on Christmas Day 1927 in preparation for a
forthcoming meeting of the library committee
(WIA, III.12.6.1, [25]):
The library conceived as a weapon of enlightenment against orthodox dogmatism: Luther
The French Revolution
Natural sciences
Liberating the responsibility to think for oneself
[Die Bibliothek als Aufklrungswaffe gegen die
orthodoxe Dogmatik entstanden: Luther
Franzsische Revolution
Naturwissenschaften
Befreiung der denkenden Selbstverantwortlichkeit]
Although these gnomic remarks are probably intended to apply to libraries in general, they focus attention on the mission of the Warburg Institute Library in particular, which may be described as the
pledge to oppose intellectual orthodoxy and thereby
to function as an intellectual spur. Luther; the French
Revolution; the natural sciences: all these have sought
or achieved liberation from the strictures of intellectual convention. In so doing, all have inspired in others the responsibility to think for oneself the duty
of the individual to map out his or her own universe
of knowledge instead of following in the well-beaten
track. Analogously, it may be said that the aim of the
Warburg Institute Library classification is to endow
users of the library with the impulse and wherewithal
to develop intellectual independence.

References
Account of the safe-guarded open access system in public lending libraries: prepared and circulated by the
librarians in charge of English open access public libraries. 1899. London: n.p.
Bing, Gertrud. 1934. The Warburg Institute. Library
Association record 4th ser. 1: 262-66.
Bing, Gertrud. 1998. Fritz Saxl (1890-1944): A biographical memoir: reprinted in the fiftieth anniversary year of his death. London: The Warburg Institute.
Brown, James Duff. 1898. Manual of library classification and shelf arrangement. London: Library
Supply Company.
Brown, James Duff. 1906. Subject classification. London: Library Supply Co.
Bcher, Karl. 1912. Hochschulfragen: Vortrge und
Aufstze. Leipzig: Wrner.
Dewey decimal classification and relative index. 1958.
16th ed. 2 vols. Lake Placid Club, NY: Forest Press.
Buzs, Ladizlaus. 1986. German library history, 8001945. Jefferson, NC: McFarland.
Dziatzko, Karl. 1893. Entwickelung und gegenwrtiger
Stand der wissenschaftlichen Bibliotheken Deutschlands unter besonderer Bercksichtigung Preussens.
Leipzig: Spirgatis.
Ebert, Friedrich Adolf. 1820. Die Bildung des Bibliothekars. 2nd ed. Leipzig: Steinacker und Wagner.
Friman, Mari et al. 1995. Chaos or order?: Aby Warburgs Library of Cultural History and its classification. Knowledge organization 22: 23-29.
Jrgens, Adolf. 1928. Die Stellung der Public Library im Bildungswesen der Vereinigten Staaten von
Amerika. Zentralblatt fr Bibliothekswesen 45:
19-33.
Leyh, Georg. 1912. Das Dogma von der systematischen Aufstellung. Zentralblatt fr Bibliothekswesen 29: 241-59.
Leyh, Georg ed. 1957. Handbuch der Bibliothekswissenschaft. 2nd ed. Vol. 3.2. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
Library of Congress Classification: B-BJ, Philosophy,
Psychology. 2000. Washington, DC: Library of
Congress Cataloging Distribution Service.
Milkau, Fritz ed. 1933. Handbuch der Bibliothekswissenschaft. Vol. 2. Leipzig: Harrassowitz.
Mills, Jack and Broughton, Vanda. 1978. Bliss bibliographic classification: Class I, Psychology & Psychiatry. 2nd ed. London: Butterworth.
Mitchell, Joan S. et al. ed. 2003. Dewey decimal classification and relative index. 22nd ed. 4 vols. Dublin,
OH: OCLC Online Computer Library Center.

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


C. Minter. Liberating the Responsibility to Think for Oneself: the Warburg Institute Library Classification

Molbech, Christian. 1833. Ueber Bibliothekwissenschaft oder Einrichtung und Verwaltung ffentlicher
Bibliotheken. Leipzig: Hinrich.
Outline of the Library of Congress Classification.
1942. Washington, DC: Library of Congress Processing Department.
Petzholdt, Julius. 1856. Katechismus der Bibliothekenlehre: Anleitung zur Einrichtung und Verwaltung von Bibliotheken. Leipzig: Weber.
Saxl, Fritz. [1921]. Bericht ber die Bibliothek Warburg und ihre Entwicklung zu einem ffentlichen
Forschungsinstitut. In Stockhausen, Kulturwissenschaftliche Bibliothek Warburg, pp. 116-24.
Saxl, Fritz. 1923. Die Bibliothek Warburg und ihr
Ziel. In Saxl, Fritz ed., Vortrge der Bibliothek
Warburg 1921-1922. Leipzig: Teubner, pp. 1-10.
Saxl, Fritz. 1926. Bericht ber die bersiedlung der
Bibliothek Warburg aus dem Hause Heilwigstrae
114 in den Neubau Heilwigstrae 116. In Tilmann
von Stockhausen. 1992. Die Kulturwissenschaftliche Bibliothek Warburg: Architektur, Einrichtung
und Organisation. Hamburg: Dlling und Galitz,
pp. 183-87.
Saxl, Fritz. 1970. The History of Warburgs Library
(1886-1944). In Gombrich, Ernst H., Aby Warburg: an intellectual biography. London: The Warburg Institute, pp. 325-38.
Sayers, William Charles Berwick. 1967. A manual of
classification for librarians. 4th ed. London:
Deutsch.
Schfer, Hans-Michael. 2003. Die Kulturwissenschaftliche Bibliothek Warburg: Geschichte und Persnlichkeiten der Bibliothek Warburg mit Bercksichtigung der Bibliothekslandschaft und der Stadtsituation der Freien und Hansestadt Hamburg zu Beginn
des 20. Jahrhunderts. Berlin: Logos.
Schrettinger, Martin. 1808. Versuch eines vollstndigen Lehrbuches der Bibliothek-Wissenschaft oder
Anleitung zur vollkommenen Geschftsfhrung eines Bibliothekrs. Vol. 1. Munich: Im Verlage des
Verfassers.
Settis, Salvatore. 1996. Warburg continuatus: Description dune Bibliothque. In Baratin, Marc and
Jacob, Christian ed., Le Pouvoir des Bibliothques:
La Mmoire des Livres en Occident. Paris: Albin
Michel, pp. 122-69.
Stockhausen, Tilmann von. 1992. Die Kulturwissenschaftliche Bibliothek Warburg: Architektur, Einrichtung und Organisation. Hamburg: Dlling und
Galitz.
Trapp, Joseph Burney. 1961. The Warburg Institute.
Studi medievali 3rd ser. 2: 745-50.

207

Trapp, Joseph Burney. 1984. The Warburg Institute


and its Activities. Kunstchronik 37: 197-202.
Trapp, Joseph Burney. 1986. Aby Warburg, his Library, and the Warburg Institute. Theoretische Geschiedenis 13.2: 169-86.
Warburg, Aby. 1938-39. A lecture on serpent ritual.
Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 2:
277-92.
Warburg, Aby. 2001. Tagebuch der Kulturwissenschaftlichen Bibliothek Warburg: Mit Eintrgen von Gertrud Bing und Fritz Saxl. Ed. Karen Michels and
Charlotte Schoell-Glass. Berlin: Akademie.
Warburg Institute. 1952. Annual report 1951-1952.
London: The Warburg Institute.
Warburg Institute. 1958. Annual report 1957-1958.
London: The Warburg Institute.
Warburg Institute. 1967. Catalog of the Warburg Institute Library. 2nd ed. Vol. 1. Boston: Hall.
Wind, Edgar. 1935. The Warburg Institute classification scheme. Library Association record 4th ser. 2:
193-95.
Yates, Frances. 2002. Giordano Bruno and the hermetic tradition. London: Routledge.
Warburg Institute Archive.
The following sources are cited in accordance with
Warburg Institute Archive (WIA) guidelines.
TS = typescript; MS = manuscript.
WIA, Ia.1. Annual Reports I: 1921-1932:
Ia.1.2.1. Bericht ber die Bibliothek Warburg fr
das Jahr 1922, TS, 18 fols.
Ia.1.6.1. Annual Report 1926, TS carbon copy with
MS corrections in Warburgs and Bings hand; 23
fols. (fols. 1-13 by Saxl, fols. 14-23 by Warburg).
WIA, Ia.2. Annual Reports II: 1933-1948:
Ia.2.1.1. The Warburg Institute. ReportFebruary
1934, TS carbon copy with MS notes in Bings
hand, 18 fols.
WIA, I.4.5. Coloured charts and graphs showing
the contents and growth of the library between
1886 and 1926:
I.4.5.1. Bibliothek Warburg Jahrestabellen, 18861917, Festwesen, Geschichte, Aestetik, 1 fol.
I.4.5.2. Bibliothek Warburg Jahrestabellen, 18861917, Philosophie, Kulturgeschichte, Litteraturgeschichte, Buchkunst, 1 fol.
I.4.5.3. Bibliothek Warburg Jahrestabellen, 18861917, Kunstgeschichte, Zeitschriften, Philologie, 1 fol.

208

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


C. Minter. Liberating the Responsibility to Think for Oneself: The Warburg Institute Library Classification

I.4.5.4. Bibliothek Warburg Jahrestabellen, 18861917, Archologie, Zeitschriften, 1 fol.


I.4.5.5. Bibliothek Warburg Wissenschafts-Tabellen, 1886-1910, 1 fol.
I.4.5.6. Accession graph 1886-1917, 1 fol.
I.4.5.8. Jahrestabelle, annual book purchases, listed
by subject, 1911-1915, 1 fol.
I.4.5.9. Jahrestabelle, annual book purchases, listed
by subject, 1916-1917, 1 fol.

I.4.5.10. Neuanschaffungen and Vergleich des


prozentuellen Zuwachses der einzelnen Abteilungen, 1921-1922, 1 fol., legend by Gertrud Bing.
I.4.5.13. Neu-Erwerbungen, 1925-1926, 1 fol., legend by Gertrud Bing.
WIA, III.12.6.1. Kuratorium, Sitzung 31.12.1927,
MS.

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Ok nam Park. Opening Ontology Design: A Study of the Implications of Knowledge Organization for Ontology Design

209

Opening Ontology Design:


A Study of the Implications of Knowledge
Organization for Ontology Design*
Ok nam Park
University of Washington, The Information School, Seattle, WA 98195-2840,
<parko@u.washington.edu>

Ok nam Park is a PhD candidate at The Information School, University of Washington. Her research
interests bridge practice and research in knowledge organization, and her dissertation explores an
empirical investigation of classification systems design practice in an organizational setting. She
obtained her MIS at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Ok nam has been working on
diverse research projects related to classification systems design, ontologies, and metadata.

Ok nam Park. Opening Ontology Design: A Study of the Implications of Knowledge


Organization for Ontology Design. Knowledge Organization, 35(4), 209-221. 43 references.
Abstract: It is proposed that sufficient research into ontology design has not been achieved and that this deficiency has led to
the insufficiency of ontology in reinforcing its communications frameworks, knowledge sharing and re-use applications. In
order to diagnose the problems of ontology research, I first survey the notion of ontology in the context of ontology design,
based on a Means-Ends tool provided by a Cognitive Work Analysis. The potential contributions of knowledge organization in
library and information sciences that can be used to improve the limitations of ontology research are demonstrated. I propose a
context-centered view as an approach for ontology design, and present faceted classification as an appropriate method for
structuring ontology. In addition, I also provides a case study of wine ontology in order to demonstrate how knowledge
organization approaches in library and information science can improve ontology design.

* Acknowledgements: The author would like to acknowledge Allyson Carlyle, Raya Fidel, and the anonymous reviewers for
their helpful suggestions.

1. Introduction
Ontologies are often cited as a critical part of information system design. Firstly, they help sustain a
communications framework around the domains of
interest between people, organizations, and systems
by providing a shared and common understanding of
a domain. Secondly, they enable knowledge re-use
and sharing, since other researchers can adopt or integrate an ontology for their own purposes (Noy &
McGuinness 2001). They facilitate interoperability
among systems by specifying and translating different concepts and languages in a domain (or across
several domains). A well-developed ontology produces cost-time benefits by eliminating or reducing
the cost of re-inventing a knowledge base system for

each use (Uschold & Grninger 1996). Furthermore,


ontologies help users learn domain knowledge and,
in addition, browse and search for information by
providing structured knowledge representation.
With these anticipated benefits, the term ontology has been discussed at length across disciplines
and research communities in such areas as computer
science, artificial intelligence, database, knowledge
representation, knowledge engineering, semantic web
groups, and knowledge organization. The term of ontology has been discussed in LIS research recently;
several researchers have tried to identify the relationships between ontology and knowledge organization
(KO) in LIS (Adams 2002, Gilchrist 2003, Jacob
2003, Soergel 1999); however, in-depth discussions of
how studies in KO may advance ontology research

210

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Ok nam Park. Opening Ontology Design: A Study of the Implications of Knowledge Organization for Ontology Design

have been noticeably absent, and with this study I


aim to bridge this gap.
In this study I investigate those aspects of ontology research that call for improvement. A current
study focuses on ontology design based on a solid
understanding of the notion of ontology. The study
of ontology design, such as current guidelines of ontology design and the strengths and weaknesses
therein, is critical to future growth in the field since
most ontologies are designed manually (Noy &
Hafner 1997). A general understanding of the concepts of ontology is also in need for further investigation. Current studies demonstrate a lack of understanding of the fundamental concepts, including the
main underlying themes and what these themes
mean for the design of information systems. In addition, there are also areas of confusion in the use of
the term ontology (Adams 2002, Ding 2001, Jacob
2003, Kim 2002, Poli 1996). Poli (1996) states that
the term ontology is used with a variety of meanings; in some specific fields, such as Artificial Intelligence (AI), the new label of ontology appears
merely to be attached to areas of inquiry that have
already been well delimited and consolidated.
These two areas are not mutually exclusive. A
clear understanding of the fundamental concepts of
ontology would anchor methodological discussion
of ontology design and provide an idea of what, precisely, it requires for support. Prieto-Daz (2002)
presented faceted classification in KO for ontology
design. However, this paper did not explicitly clarify
what areas need further discussion for ontology research and how facets can improve these inadequacies for ontology. That is, Prieto-Diaz did not provide this semantic linkage between facet classification, ontology design and ontology purposes.
To stretch this semantic link further from PrietoDazs study, I hope to attempt to clarify the meaning of the term ontology and to improve ontology
design. Therefore, the present study poses the following questions:
How do knowledge organization studies provide
benefits for ontology studies in general?
What are the weaknesses of ontology studies?
How do knowledge organization studies improve
upon these weaknesses?
I begin with a survey of the relationship between ontology and KO, then discuss ontology design in the
context of the notion of ontology based on a MeansEnds tool, which is provided by a Cognitive Work

Analysis. In investigate the kinds of problems currently facing ontology research, then demonstrate
the potential contributions of KO in LIS in order to
better define the limitations of ontology research.
These inquiries form the methodological foundation
for ontology design, based on a sound understanding
of the concept of ontology itself. I propose a context-centered approach for ontology design and suggest faceted classification as a method for structuring
ontology. Finally, a case study of wine ontology is
included to show how KO approaches in LIS can be
applied to ontology design.
2. Ontology vs. Classification in Knowledge
Organization
Classification in knowledge organization (KO) and
ontology are very similar: both are knowledge representation systems, both consist of terms, and both
exhibit structured relationships (Adams 2002).
There have been several studies of ontology in LIS
(Adams 2002, Ding 2001, Fisher 1998, Gilchrist
2003, Jacob 2003, Moreira & Alvarenga 2004, Soergel 1999, Vickery 1997). Most have discussed the introduction of ontology in LIS as an emerging area in
the semantic web or artificial intelligent areas along
with survey backgrounds, ontology language and
techniques, and projects, (Ding 2001, Jacob 2003,
Soergel 1999, Vickery 1997); some researchers have
attempted to identify the relationships between ontology and classification or thesaurus use in library
sciences (Adams 2000, Gilchrist 2001, Jacob 2003,
Soergel 1999).
Adams (2002) mentioned that in some research
instances, ontology and taxonomies are used as
synonyms. Jacob (2003) wrote that ontologies have
been regarded as classification schemes, thesauri,
controlled vocabularies, terminologies, and even dictionaries. Soergel (1999) also pointed out that classification has been used in library and information
science for a long period of time, and that the term
ontology has been added only recently in areas
such as AI, knowledge representation, and semantic
web.
Gilchrist (2001) and Adams (2002) also tried to
differentiate ontology from other knowledge organization systems in LIS such as classification systems
or thesauri. The first difference asserted was intended
use. A knowledge organization system strives to assist users in information retrieval, whereas ontology
usually aspires to maintain problem-solving and decision-making for systems and humans in a broader

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Ok nam Park. Opening Ontology Design: A Study of the Implications of Knowledge Organization for Ontology Design

sense (Vickery 1997, Jacob 2003). In addition, a


knowledge organization system is a tool used to locate and interrelate information, while ontology is a
tool for knowledge re-use and exchange. Jacob (2003)
tried to differentiate knowledge organization system
and ontology by establishing that ontology allows
more semantic representation of relationships beyond
the hierarchies and simple relationships among terms
used in a knowledge organization system.
Discussing how ontology and knowledge organization systems differ from each other is difficult, as
the broadness of the concepts of ontology and
knowledge organization systems differ among researchers. An ontology has a broad range of dictionary and glossary terms, incorporating more items
than classification systems and including logical inheritance. Knowledge organization systems have
broadened the traditional range of use in library sciences. Recent studies in knowledge organization
demonstrate how knowledge organization systems
can be used in some organizations or domain settings (Hjrland 2003). Some argue that a knowledge
organization system is a boundary object for a communication tool (Bowker & Start 1999, Albrechtsen
& Jacob 1998) and for knowledge integration
(Albrechtsen & Pejtersen, 2003). Knowledge organization research has also studied more relational
structures than traditional hierarchies.
The distinction between ontology and knowledge
organization systems is blurry; the discussion might
prove more fruitful if the study focuses primarily on
how these different approaches could benefit from
each other; particularly of note in this paper is how
knowledge organization design studies could provide
advantages for ontology design studies.
3. Understanding Ontology

211

domain exists, what priorities are embedded in it,


what functions exist, and how it is physically framed
according to activities and resources. The hierarchy
also allows many-to-many mappings between levels.
MEANS-ENDS Relations

Properties Represented

Goals and Constraints

Goal, the purpose of a work


domain; Constraints, the
sources which affect the work
domain, but cannot be changed by a work domain

Priority Measure

Properties to establish priorities according to the intention


behind the work domain

General Functions

A set of main and recurrent


activities conducted to satisfy
the goal of a work domain

Processes and Activities

Actual activities used to support and maintain the functions in a domain

Physical Resources

Resources both used and created within a work domain including actors involved in the
activities of a domain.

Table 1. Means-Ends Abstraction Hierarchy (Albrechtsen,


H., & Pejtersen, A.M., 2003)

These levels also reveal why-what-how relationships,


as shown in table 2 (Vicente 1999 165); anything in a
function level (What?) can be seen as an end
(Why?) for a lower level, as a process, and as a
means (How?) for higher level priorities. For example, in order for a work domain comprised of a
classification system design team to design a classification system according to user need (priority
why), the team needs to manage external collaborations (functionswhat) based on discussions with
customer service centers (processeshow). A M-E
tool is therefore appropriate for understanding what,
how, and why people actually work in practice.

3.1. A Means-Ends Tool


The territory of ontology design is analyzed using a
Means-Ends tool (M-E). M-E tools were originally
developed for Cognitive Work Analysis (CWA)
(Rasmussen, Pejtersen, & Goodstein 1994, Vicente
1999), and are used to map a work domain via an abstraction hierarchy system. A M-E tool features five
primary units of analysis, from the most abstract
level of goals and constraints, to the most concrete
level of resources. The representation of a MeansEnds abstraction hierarchy for a work domain is illustrated in table 1 below. The analysis of five levels
of abstraction hierarchies describes why the work

Goals
What?
Constraints
Priorities
How?
Functions
Processes
Resources

Why?
What?
How?

Why?
What?
How?

Why?
What?
How?

Why?
What?

Table 2. Means-Ends Hierarchy (Mai, J-E. 2004, 208)

A M-E tool for the analysis of the territory of ontology design has two implications. First, the map of
a work domain by the why-what-how relationship
provides the entire structure of the ontology domain, and describes what an ontology work domain

212

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Ok nam Park. Opening Ontology Design: A Study of the Implications of Knowledge Organization for Ontology Design

looks like. Current ontology discussions are somewhat dispersed in diverse discussion areas; some focus primarily on ontological backgrounds and goals
(Chandrasekaran et al., 1999, Ding 2001, Ding &
Foo 2002), some mainly discuss technologies and
projects (Fensel 2002, Gruber 1993, Hyvnen et al.,
2003), and others focus on design techniques (Gruber 1994, Guarino 1997, Noy and Hafner 1997).
This mapping tool enables the examination of ontology design across diverse study areas and reveals a
deeper understanding of semantic relationships
which ultimately assists researchers in revealing the
missing links within a specific ontology design and
presenting appropriate improvements. For example,
using this mapping tool, a researcher is able to suggest additional processes when an inadequate number exist (What?) to support one function in a
domain (Why?).

acting as a shared and common understanding


framework of a domain of interest, can facilitate interactions among people. For example, if there is a
unifying research field in which people from different fields work together, diverse terms and perspectives can create disturbed communications, causing
interaction problems in the absence of a shared
framework. Having a shared understanding leads to
minimized interaction problems and facilitates the
exchange of ideas.
An ontology also purports communications
among systems through interoperability (Ding 2001,
2002, Gruber 1994, Uschold 1996). By using an ontology, different systems in a domain of interest can
communicate with each other and utilize shared information. This study supports communication between systems across domains by providing an integrated ontology.

3.2. Untangling Ontology

3.2.3. Constraints

3.2.1. Purposes

Constraints are vital parameters in ontology design


since they may enable, as well as limit, ontology design. Language is a good example of a design constraint. The design of an ontology aims to implement a system and is defined in a machine-processable language; if an ontology needs to be developed in a specific language such as OWL (Web Ontology Language), an ontology should exist within
the boundary of representation that the language
permits. Time and budget are also constraints, since
the preparing, designing, and testing of an ontology
is restricted by both. Other constraints are more
philosophical in nature. Take the term ontology, for
example: Ontology with an uppercase O refers to
the branch of philosophy, while ontology with a
lowercase o refers to the term as used in many areas related to information science (Jacob, 2003). Philosophically, the original term Ontology refers to
a particular theory about the nature of being or the
kinds of existence (van Hejist et al. 1996); thus, the
ultimate goal of Ontology is to find truth and attempt to answer questions such as What constitutes
a complete and exhaustive description of all things in
the universe? What are features and types are common to all beings? (Guarino 1997, Smith 1995,
Zuniga 2001). With these definitions in mind, ontology design must attempt to find what may or may
not exist in reality, while seeking an objective description of the nature of existence and the structure of reality (Jacob 2003).

Creating an ontology aims to serve two purposes


knowledge sharing/reusability, and cost/effort reduction. If there is an ontology for the concept of
time, many domains can adopt and use this ontology
for their own purposes, rather than designing a
whole new concept for every specific task (Noy et
al., 2001). An ontology leads to the reduction of unnecessary and duplicated efforts required to build an
ontology, thereby justifying the high cost of building
an ontology and enabling the sharing and use of the
knowledge bases of an ontology across systems
(Guarino 1997, Noy, et al., 2001, Vickery 1997).
These aspects of ontology can be particularly beneficial in business sectors (Fensel 2002, Smith 1995,
Uschold et al. 1998), such as international banking
corporations with different branches in different
countries (Smith 1995).
3.2.2. Priorities
An ontology serves knowledge sharing/reusability
and cost/effort reduction by providing a shared and
common understanding framework of a domain of
interest between people and systems (Ding 2001,
Fensel 2001, Gruber 1994, Uschold and Gruinger
1996, Uschold et al. 1996). An important subpriority of creating an ontology is to support communication between people. Uschold and Gruinger
(1996) presented several cases of how an ontology,

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Ok nam Park. Opening Ontology Design: A Study of the Implications of Knowledge Organization for Ontology Design

213

3.2.4. Functions

3.2.6. Resources

The priorities of an ontology are upheld by several


activities of ontology design. Ontology design is
achieved by gaining domain knowledge through
scoping and design preparation, making domain
knowledge more explicit (structuring), representing
domain knowledge in a machine-processable language, and creating general conventions for the use
of the ontology (Ding 2001, 2002, Gruber 1993,
Guarino 1997, Jacob 2003, Noy and McGuinness
2001, Uschold 1996, Vickery 1997). Ontology commitment is an established agreement about the
knowledge of a domain represented in ontology,
such as shared assumptions or pre-existing models of
a domain (Gruber 1993).

The processes of ontology design employ several resources. In order to process an ontology in a machine understandable way, ontology developers,
computers, programming languages, programming
language skills, and individual programs are necessary. Within all abstract-hierarchy systems of ontology design, an ontology can finally be created for the
role of an explicitly defined reference model of application domains (Ding and Foo 2002, 124), and
supports shared understanding and communication.
In the end, the ontology leads to knowledge sharing
and reusability, saves unnecessary costs and efforts,
and justifies the high costs of system development
and management (Vickery 1997).
The summary of the analysis of ontology design is
presented in table 3 below.

3.2.5. Process
Each function of ontology design is supported by
several specific processes. In order to gain domain
knowledge, ontology developers are required to
scope a project; to achieve effective scoping, developers must first determine a domain and decide on
the specificity of an ontology (Noy and McGuinness
2001, Uschold 1996). To make domain knowledge
more explicit, an ontology can be generated from the
domain knowledge gained through the scoping process, then expanded through the sub-processes of
enumerating terms, defining concepts/relationships,
and providing definitions (Gruber 1993, 1994, Noy
and McGuinness 2001). The varied processes are approached using one of several methods: bottom-up
(specification concept to generalization), top-down
(generalization to specification), or middle-out
(from key concepts) paradigms may be employed,
depending on the specific features of the project
domain (Ding and Foo 2002). Domain knowledge
may also be presented using diverse granularity or
specificity levels such as problem-solving, defining
specific tasks, and generalizing the domain. The next
function required is ontology commitment, which is
an agreement onor compromise regardingthe
knowledge map represented by an ontology and a
defined conformity required to use the ontology
(Uschold and Grninger 1996). To build an ontology in both human and computer understandable
languages, it should be developed using code in addition to a computerized representational language.

3.3. Current Limitations of Ontology Design Research


The analysis of ontology design according to the abstract-hierarchy system discloses clear weaknesses in
ontology design research. The first weak point is
presented in Function 1gaining domain knowledge. Although previous studies of ontology design
have acknowledged the practicality of gaining domain knowledge for ontology design, how exactly to
acquire the required knowledge for ontology design
in detail has been missing. Although the process of
ontology scoping supports the function in a M-E
analysis, most research mentions this process only
brieflyonly two tactics for defining ontology participants and specificity were described in processes
for function1.
Gaining domain knowledge is closely related to
two additional processes that have yet to be discussed: defining the perspective ontology developers
need to acquire the knowledge they require, and
methodological frameworks they can use to do so.
Currently there is no agreement as to what the big
picture must be in order to build an ontology.
While the philosophical background influences the
objective view for ontology development, indicators
of users or context provide a more subjective
view for ontology development (Guarino 1997, Poli
1996, Chandrasekaran et al. 1999). Currently, there
is not a sufficient amount of research on how to gain
needed knowledge in a domain either. These are vital
elements for design, as good domain knowledge
guides the rest of the design process (Mai 2006).

214

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Ok nam Park. Opening Ontology Design: A Study of the Implications of Knowledge Organization for Ontology Design

Goals

Knowledge sharing and reusability

Reduced cost waste and efforts

Constraints

Budget and timeline allowed for ontology design, human resources, ontology designer domain knowledge, number of participant designer technologies, languages, approaches of ontology design

Proprieties

To provide a shared and common understanding framework of a domain:


Communication between people

Functions

Function 1:
To analyze domain
knowledge

Function 2:
To make domain
knowledge more
explicit

Communication between systems

Function 3:
OntologicalCommitment

Function 4:
To represent dmain
knowledge in a computer-processable
way

Process

Process 1: Decide the scope of an ontology (Function 1)


Process 1-1: Decide a domain (Function 1)
Process 1-2: Decide the specificity of an ontology (Function 1)
Process 2: Collect the terms required in a domain (Function 2)
Process 3: Define categories and relationships (Function 2)
Process 3-1: Choose an approachtop-down, middle-out, and bottom-up (Function 2)
Process 4: Provide definitions (Function 2)
Process 5 : To form an agreement with the terms and structures of an ontology (Function 3)
Process 6: To form an agreement with the use of an ontology for the system in a consistent manner (Function 3)
Process 7: Coding an ontology (Function 4)
Process 8: Implementing an ontology with technology (Function 4)

Resource

Domain; Users in a domain; Ontology developers; Domain experts; Language; Technology; Domain experts skills, using technology; Domain experts familiarity with the domain; Ontology design guidelines
Table 3. Means-Ends Analysis for an Ontology

The second limitation pertains to how an ontology is


to be structured (function 2). The chosen paradigm
of ontology design, whether it be bottom-up, topdown, or middle-out, describes this function in a mechanical way. These paradigms have not been discussed in great detail, and it is still unclear how ontology should be structured or how to form appropriate categories and relationships. Structural methods in knowledge organization are generally divided
into two approaches, enumerative and faceted. Concepts are structured hierarchically in an enumerative
method, while ideas are structured according to aspects or characteristics of a domain in a faceted
method. The structural method ultimately influences
the processes detailed in Function 2, and relevant discussion is currently missing in discussions on ontology design. Without a detailed structural method, it is
difficult to build a well-organized ontology.
Most ontology development has been conducted
on an ad-hoc basis (Noy & Hafner 1997), and has

focused almost exclusively on Functions 3 and 4. Recent articles have discussed application technologies
like RDF (Resource Description Frameworks) or
OWL (Web Ontology Language)for which ontology design has been exploredor on well-known or
on-going ontology projects. Noy and McGuinness
(2001) published development guides of ontologies
in order to support ontology development using semantic web technologies such as Protg, and the
guidelines developed were compliant with what Protg supports. These examples suggest that ontology
design has been limited to representing ontologies in
a machine-processable way.
In summary, a M-E analysis revealed a lack of discussion of Functions 1 and 2 and their processes.
These are not disconnected issues in ontology design, and without a sufficient understanding of these
functions, processes are not specified in sufficient
detail. This generates a set of fairly limited guidelines
for the use of resources in ontology design and ulti-

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Ok nam Park. Opening Ontology Design: A Study of the Implications of Knowledge Organization for Ontology Design

mately leads to inefficient ontology design. A welldeveloped ontology produces cost-time benefits and
supports knowledge sharing (Uschold and Grninger 1996); with these expected benefits, ontologies
have been discussed at length in many disciplines and
research communities. Despite the many advantages
of creating an ontology, it is difficult to understand
how an ontology can present benefits in application
areas improve communications among systems and
people, and exemplify knowledge sharing and reuse.
One reason that these intricacies are difficult to pinpoint is that an excess of mechanical discussion of
ontology development in Function 3 and 4 has been
conducted, while structuring an ontology (Function
2) based on the understanding of a domain (Function 1) is limited.
Without an appropriate ontology to reflect a domain, ontology may be unable to serve as a communication framework in a domain. It may not provide
sufficient benefits for knowledge sharing, use, or
cost-reductions. Further discussions of ontology
specifically, how to gain needed knowledge of a domain and how to construct an suitable ontology
would be valuable for the field of ontology design.
4. The Implications of Knowledge Organization
for Ontology Construction
4.1. A Context-Centered View on Ontology
A recent trend in knowledge organization research is
to develop organizational schemes using context as a
primary motivator (Mai 2004). Traditional knowledge organization research focuses on the development of objective and universal guidelines or structures of knowledge, whereas knowledge organization
in context considers user groups and the social, cultural, and historical dimensions of the context to be
served. Context-based knowledge organization is
one step further from a user-centered approach,
which primarily focuses on users and their needs.
The rise of context-centered approaches in knowledge organization is fundamentally driven by the
recognition of the limits of system-centered approachesa single classification scheme does not
necessarily reflect the level of specificity of document representation across specific domains (Hjrland 2002, Mai 2005), and often fails to meet the required point of view, which could be specific to the
user, a library, or an information center (Hjrland
2002, Mai 2005). Traditional knowledge organization
approaches are limited. Reflections of context and

215

classification cannot be regarded as absolute, objective, or neutral any longer; rather they should be
conditioned contextually (Hjrland 2002).
Below are some examples that further illustrate
the dependency of the meanings of words in context. Lakeoff (1987, 93) developed a classification
that expresses relativity of knowledge in traditional
Dyirbal, an aboriginal language of Australia:
I.

Bayi:

II.

Balan:

(human) males; animals


(human) females; water; fire; fighting

III. Balam:

Non-flesh food

IV.

Everything not in the other classes

Bala:

Table 4. Cultural Dependency of Categories (Lakeoff 1989,


93)

The basic schema of this categorization consists of


four entities. According to the Dyirbal classification,
women, water, fire, and fighting are all in the same
category: fire is dangerous, and water extinguishes
fire, hence they fall into the same category. Women
are just as dangerous as fire in the Dyirbal cognition,
and therefore belong to the same category. To understand this classification is to understand Dyirbal beliefs and myths, i.e., the working of a language that
mirrors its culture. Such a classification is unique to
Dyirbal and is not likely to be applicable in other
cultures (see table 4).
Kwasnik and Rubin (2003) also established the
differences in knowledge structures of fourteen different cultures by mapping out the words related to
kinship. While the domain of kinship is universal, the meanings of words for relatives vary from
culture to culture. For example, the English language
does not distinguish between ones mothers sister
and brother from ones fathers sister and brother
they are all categorically called aunt or uncle.
However, in other cultures, such as Korean, paternal
and maternal designations are quite different.; in order to o translate the English word aunt into its
Korean counterpart, therefore, one must know its
specific context.
These arguments demonstrating the dependency
of a point of view on context apply to ontology research as well. There is an ontological approach in
which the construct should be based on identifying
common concepts that are pertinent across domains
and points of view. This expresses the idea that ontology should be constructed objectively and neutrally, centering on the system and the data. Although there is no guarantee that ontology based on

216

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Ok nam Park. Opening Ontology Design: A Study of the Implications of Knowledge Organization for Ontology Design

an independent view will provide benefits for use


across a number of applications, or knowledge sharing and re-use, some ontology researchers are currently obstructed by assuming that it will not.
Ontology is a shared and common understanding
of some domains of interest (Gruber 1994, 909).
Ontology is the particular view of the domain of interest, as agreed upon by people in that domain. Ontological commitment means more than just agreement in terms of vocabularies; it represents shared assumptions and conceptualizations of the ontology of
the domain. If a particular view of the domain of interest is diverse and relative to certain domains, objectively and neutrally constructed ontology would
fail to serve the domains of interests that the ontology actually aims to serve. This may lead developers
to sub-optimize the functions or goals of ontology.
Ontology ought to acknowledge the limitations of
the objective and neutral approach to ontology design, rather taking a context-centered view, in order
to make the domain knowledge explicit. Ontology
development deriving from a more in-depth understanding of context would boost ontologys contribution to knowledge sharing and re-use.
How, then, can we go about studying context in
ontology, a missing area of ontology research? Even
though some KO researchers (e.g., Albrechtsen and
Pejtersen 2003; Hjrland 2002) have noted this need
and suggested methodological studies of context,
current research in classification system design considering user and users context are very conceptual
and theoretical. They have not given specific practical guidelines to adopt for classification system design, and they have not actually shown how these
approaches would help the design of classification
systems. Much research needs to be done before
they are adaptable to practice. For example, Hjrland
(2002) proposed eleven approaches to domain analysisliterature guides, special classifications and
thesauri, indexing and retrieving specialties, empirical user studies, bibliometrical studies, etc. He did
not, however, specify how to employ each method to
gain knowledge of user context. He also did not
point out when to use a specific method, and did not
detail how to incorporate the study of user context
into design of classification systems. Albrechtsen
and Pejtersen (2003)s CWA takes into account various dimensions from macro levels to individual resources, and aims to understand user context; however, it is still challenging to transform the analysis
into actual classification systems. This transformative process from the analysis of work practice into

classification system design has yet to be discussed,


and only a few results of this study such as Bookhouse (Pejtersen 1989), which is a fiction retrieval
system, have appeared. Therefore, this research area
should be advanced in the future by KO and ontology research communities.
4.2. Facet Classification as Guidelines
for Structuring Ontology
Faceted classification, which has been devised by
Ranganathan (1962), aims to provide a way to build
classification systems based on facet analysis. Facet
analysis primarily comprises the following procedures: analyzing a subject domain into terms, then
sorting terms into a facet (Ellis and Vasconcelos
1999) so that the subject description of a document
can be represented by combining terms in multiple
facets. The indispensable concept of faceted classification is the facet, which is a clearly defined, mutually
exclusive, and collectively exhaustive aspect, property,
or characteristic of a class or specific subject that reveals the different views, perspectives, or dimensions
of a particular domain. The faceted classification has
benefits over enumerative classification structures in
that it is more than hierarchies and it allows more
flexibility in adding new concepts and structuring in
general. This type of classification has been employed by information system researchers primarily
because it has the potential for enhanced knowledge
representation, information retrieval, and browsing
by information systems. Ranganathan, who originally
developed the faceted classification, established the
theory of faceted analysis. Later, the Classification
Research Group modified Ranganathans theory of
facet analysis to enhance its functionality (Spiteri
1998). Spiteri (1998) combined these two models and
developed a simplified model of faceted analysis. She
represented a model based on principles for the
choice of facets, principles for the citation order of
facets and foci, and principles for the verbal plane.
Principles for the choice of facets are as per the
following:
Differentiation: A facet should represent a distinguished characteristic.
Relevance: A facet should indicate a target and scope
of the classification system.
Permanence: A facet should reflect a permanent
characteristic.
Ascertainty: A facet should be explicit and determinative.

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Ok nam Park. Opening Ontology Design: A Study of the Implications of Knowledge Organization for Ontology Design

Homogeneity: Facets should be homogeneous, and


one facet needs to represent only one characteristic.
Mutual exclusivity: Facets should not be overlapping.
Fundamental categories: A facet should represent a
fundamental characteristic.
Principles for the citation order of facets and foci
consist of the principle of relevant succession,
chronological order, alphabetical order, and spatial/geometric order, simple to complex order, complex to simple order, canonical order, increasing
quantity and decreasing quantity, and the principle of
consistent succession. Principles for the verbal plane,
lastly, are composed of context, symbolizing that the
meaning of terminology should be subject to context. Currency, which denotes that terminology,
should reflect the current usage in a domain.
The main reasons that the faceted classification
bear relevance for ontology, especially insofar as it
might improve ontology structure, are as follows:
some ontologies, such as the Wine and Enterprise
ontology, illustrate similar types of faceted classifications. For example, an Enterprise ontology, which
supports business modeling, consists of activity and
process, organization, strategy, marketing, and time,
which represent the particular dimensions of a business. A wine ontology consists of winery, wine region, wine grapes, etc., implying the properties of a
wine domain. These categories are very similar with
facets, in that they try to show different characteristics of that domain, although they do not use the
termfacets in ontologies. Some ontology projects
recently employed the term facet for ontology
(Hyvnen et al. 2003, Noy & McGuinness 2001,
Prieto-Daz 2002, Tzitzikas et al. 2002). Prieto-Daz
(2002) presented faceted classification for ontology,
which directly inspired this paper to address how
facets can improve ontology design, why ontology
design needs to be studied, in what aspects ontology
design has been missing, and how KO can contribute
to ontology in detail to ontology design and ontology purposes (Prieto-Diaz did not provide this semantic linkage between facet classification),.He introduced faceted classification instead of representing how faceted classification can make difference.
In addition, as McIlwaine & Broughton (2000) argued, facet has been used as a buzzword in ontology
and other knowledge representation areas, and people have adopted facet without in-depth knowledge
of classification theories. Therefore, providing explicit definition and principles of faceted classifica-

217

tion is expected to encourage a more structured ontology construction than current ad-hoc-based ontology development. In the next section, a case study
is conducted to demonstrate how a guideline of a
faceted classification is applied to wine ontology. A
wine ontology based on a faceted classification is different from current wine ontologies.
4.3. Case Studies of Wine Ontology
The following wine ontology is employed to display
how context-centered viewpoints and Spiteris faceted analysis are applied in ontology design. The
wine ontology used below was developed by Noy
and Machiness (2001), based on the following development process: 1) defining classes in the ontology,
2) arranging the classes in a hierarchy, 3) defining
properties and values, 4) defining the facets of the
properties of classes. They employed the term
facet to build their wine ontology. The aim of the
ontology is for use among applications related to
restaurant-managing tools, such as making menu
suggestions, explaining wine to people, managing an
inventory list of a wine to purchase, etc. It is represented as figure 1.
Information about how this ontology was designed and constructed has not been made publicly
available to date, including information regarding
whether the ontology is based on the study of the
domain of wine or on restaurant-managing domains,
or regarding what kinds of methods are employed to
create the structure.
The study of this ontology, based on Spiteris faceted analysis, presents several insights. The choice of
facets, first of all, it does not meet the principle of
mutual exclusivity. As seen in figure 1, Consumable
Things and Meal Course include the same foci.
This does not provide different instances or form
any differences at all, which violates the principle of
differentiation following the principles of mutual exclusivity, these two facets could be merged into one
facet. Secondly, Wine Region and Winery are not
at the same level; Wine Region is a subset of Winery and may not be compliant with the principle of
homogeneity and fundamental categoriesWine
Region calls for a place under Winery. Thirdly, in
this ontology, Consumable Things and Meal
Course both include food and wine; however, if
wine is a theme or a subject of the ontology and
food is used to suggest which wine is suitable for
which food, food might be considered another facet
of the wine, rather than sub-facets with wine under

218

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Ok nam Park. Opening Ontology Design: A Study of the Implications of Knowledge Organization for Ontology Design

Figure 1. Wine Ontology

Meal Course or Consumable Things. Fourth, the


ontology also includes wine grapes as a facet, and
sugar, color, and flavor as sub-facets. This is also incompliant with the principle of homogeneitythese
categories should be placed in the same level. Fifth,
the ontology also includes soft drinks as a sub-facet
under Consumable Things/Drink; however, the
ontology aims to provide the information regarding
wine and suggest proper wines associated with food
in a restaurant, therefore, drink might not be a
useful concept here, according to the principle of
relevance.
This discussion is also applicable in terms of the
arrangement of facet and foci. Foci under the Food
facet, according to principle of relevant succession,
needs to arrange foci as per the following: appetizer,
main dishesmeat, fowl, seafood, and pasta, and
dessert. Wine Region can also be placed under the
United States region, according to the principle of
relevant succession, and alphabetical orderings can
be used. Domain study is also important for the
principle of relevant succession.
It is difficult to identify how useful this ontology
is for a communication framework for this domain.
It is also difficult to say to what extent the contextcentered view would generate a different ontology,
and such an issue lies beyond the scope of the paper.
However, some considerations of the wine domain
employing a M-E analysis in table 5 below lead us to
identify that this ontology is missing some important concepts in the wine domain, such as wine price,
occasion, vintage year, and wine types, (covering not

only color, but bubbly, dessert, low carb, and kosher


wines, for example). This might be because of a lack
of studies of wine domains. This ontology might
have some limitations for other people in the wine
domain in terms of adoption and use.
Goals
Constraints

Proprieties

G1: To recommend wines for restaurant


customers to meet their needs
Waiter or Waitresss timeline to be familiar with wines, Budget of restaurants for
purchasing wines, Communications with
wine sellers
P1: To increase gains of wine selling

Functions

F1: Manage a wine menu; F2: Recommends wines; F3: Manage an inventory
list of wine

Processes

F1-P1: Make categories of wine


F1-P2: List prices & vintage years
F2-P1: Ask customers needs such as
flavor or prices
F2-P2: Consider food menus
F2-P3: Provide some suggestions with
description
F3-P1: Manage winery and wine region
F3-P2: Keep familiar with wine trends
such as critics or competitions

Resources

Waiter or waitress wine knowledge,


contact lists of wine cellar, Wine writers, wine critics, wine competitors

Table 5. A partial M-E analysis for wine domain

Based on this discussion, the revised wine ontology


suggests the following primary facets: Wine Types,

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Ok nam Park. Opening Ontology Design: A Study of the Implications of Knowledge Organization for Ontology Design

219

Figure 2. Revised Wine Ontology

Flavor, Sugar Content, Winery, Grape Type, Prince,


Occasion, Vintage Year, Dish. (See figure 2).
Throughout the study, ontology development
processes should be based on a context-centered approach. For the structuring of knowledge representation of ontology a faceted classification would be
proposed, with Spiteris guidelines of facet analysis
and arrangement appearing to be fruitful. This simplified model of ontology development is not a
stand-alone ontology development model; the faceted classification may not work for some ontology
structures in specific domains. This study aims to
provide some possible options for practical and explicit guidelines in ontology development, and to
display how knowledge organization has the potential to help ontology design.
5. Conclusion
I have investigated possible answers to the research
question How can the study of knowledge organization be exploited for use in ontology? To answer
this question, I explored the domain of ontology design as well as a concept of ontologypurposes,
constraints, priorities, functions, processes, and resourcesbased on a Means-Ends analysis provided
by a Cognitive Work Analysis. The analysis of ontology domain revealed two major areas in a function-level to be improved upon: the general analysis
of domain knowledge and explicit investigation into
structuring of domain knowledge. In this paper I am
asserting that these deficient areas are related to a
lack of research on process-level ontological design.
Current ontology research has concentrated on an-

swering what questions: what kinds of benefits ontologies can bring, what background the term ontology has in being introduced to different disciplines
and research areas, what projects are well known in
ontology research, what kinds of technology ontology research has developed, etc. Current studies of
ontology design have been limited to the suggestion
of ontology design processes and very simple guidelines, seemingly avoiding the specificities that are
sorely lacking. They have not thoroughly discussed
how ontology design is approached, how the required information for ontology design may be obtained in the domain of interests, or how ontology
should be structured. Discussions of ontology technology and language have focused on the functions
that they bring to ontology construction, rather than
on how new ontology technology and language can
enhance ontology design. The descriptions of wellknown ontology projects do not sufficiently explain
how they were constructed. This lack of specific instruction has led to the current state of largely adhoc ontology development (Noy & Hafner 1997).
The kinds of approaches ontology design should
take and how to construct good ontology in a process
level should be created to compliment qualified ontology and move ontology design to the next level.
The semantic hierarchy relationships of ontology
domain by a M-E analysis further found that without
this complimentary material, there is an insufficient
amount of reinforcement to support additional uses
and purposes, such as communication frameworks,
knowledge sharing and re-use. I have discussed here
two primary themescontext-centered perspectives
and faceted classificationsto determine how knowl-

220

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Ok nam Park. Opening Ontology Design: A Study of the Implications of Knowledge Organization for Ontology Design

edge organization studies might be applied to address


these issues.
Of these themes, I would encourage a contextcentered view rather than context-independent, neural-objective viewpoints. Knowledge organization
studies recognize the limitations of general knowledge organization systems across different domains
and demonstrate how important context-centered
perspectives reflecting users needs are. Secondly, I
presented faceted classification as a guideline for the
development of ontology structure. Wine ontology
was applied as a case study and the model of ontology development was redefined, based on the studies
presented.
The context-centered view and faceted classification are two approaches used to develop knowledge
organization. It is risky to suggest that these will
provide all the necessary information required for
ontology design. To apply these two views in ontology might not work when developing ontology
across several system types or purposes; however,
they may serve as a guide to help ontology development research obtain a sense of direction in the future. The evaluation of ontology developed here may
prove useful in determining how this ontology
model, and the ontology developed using this approach, might work in practice.
References
Adams, Katherine. 2002. The semantic web: differentiating between taxonomies and ontologies.
Online 26(4): 20-23.
Albrechtsen, Hanne and Jacob, Elin K. 1998. The
dynamics of classification systems as boundary
objects for cooperation in the electronic library.
Library trends 47(2): 293-312.
Albrechtsen, Hanne and Pejtersen, Annelise M.
2003. Cognitive work analysis and work centered
design of classification schemes. Knowledge organization 30: 213-27.
Bowker, Geoffrey C. and Star, Susan L. 1999. Sorting
things out: classification and practice. Cambridge
(Mass): MIT Press.
Chandrasekaran,
B.,
Josephson,
John
R.,
and Benjamins, V.Richard. 1999. What are ontologies, and why do we need them? Intelligent systems
and their applications 14(1): 20-26.
Ding, Ying. 2001. A review of ontologies with the
semantic web in view. Journal of information science 27: 377-84.

Ding, Ying and Foo, Schubert. 2002. Ontology research and development. Part Ia review of ontology generation. Journal of information science
28: 123-36.
Ellis, David and Vasconcelos Ana. 1999. Ranganathan and the Net: using facet analysis to search
and organize the world wide web. Aslib proceedings 51: 3-10.
Fensel, Dieter. 2002. Ontology-based knowledge
management. Computer 35(11): 56-59.
Fischer, Dietrich H. 1998. From thesauri towards
ontologies? In Mustafa El Hadi, Widad, Maniez,
Jacques, & Pollitt, A. Stephen. eds. 1998. Structures and relations in knowledge organization: Proceedings of the Fifth International ISKO Conference, Lille, France, August 25-29, 1998. Advances
in knowledge organization 6. Wrzburg: Ergon
Verlag, pp. 18-30.
Gilchrist, Alan. 2003. Thesauri, taxonomies, and ontologiesan etymological note. Journal of documentation 59: 7-18.
Gruber, Thomas R. 1993. A translation approach to
portable ontology specifications. Knowledge acquisition 5: 199-220.
Gruber, Thomas R. 1994. Toward principles for the
design of ontologies used for knowledge sharing.
International journal of human and computer studies 43: 907-28.
Guarino, Nicola. 1997. Understanding, building and
using ontologies: a commentary to using explicit
ontologies in KBS development. International
journal of human and computer studies 46: 293-310.
Hjrland, Birger. 2002. Domain analysis in information science: eleven approachestraditional as
well as innovative. Journal of documentation 58:
422-62.
Hjrland, Birger. 2003. Fundamentals of knowledge
organization. Knowledge organization 30: 87-11.
Hyvnen, Eero, Saarela, Samppa, and Viljanen, Kim.
2003. Ontogator: combining view- and ontologybased search with semantic browsing. Proceedings
of the XML Finland 2003 Conference. Available
http://www.cs.helsinki.fi/u/eahyvone/publication
s/xmlfinland2003/yomXMLFinland2003.pdf
Jacob, Elin K. 2003. Ontologies and the semantic
web. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 29(4): 19-23.
Kim, Henry. 2002. Predicting how ontologies for the
semantic web will evolve. Communication of the
ACM 45(2): 48-54.
Kwasnik, Barbara H. and Rubin, Victoria L. 2003.
Stretching conceptual structures in classifications

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Ok nam Park. Opening Ontology Design: A Study of the Implications of Knowledge Organization for Ontology Design

across languages and cultures. Cataloging & classification quarterly 37(1/2): 33-47.
Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, fire, and dangerous
things: what categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Mai, Jens-Erik. 2004. The role of domains, documents, and decisions in indexing. In McIlwaine, Ia
C. ed. 2004. Knowledge organization and the global
information society: Proceedings of the Eighth International ISKO Conference, London, England,
July 13-16, 2004. Advances in knowledge organization 9. Wrzburg: Ergon Verlag, pp. 207-13.
Mai, Jens-Erik. 2005. Analysis in indexing: document and domain centered approaches. Information processing and management 41: 599-611.
Mai, Jens-Erik. 2006. Contextual analysis for the
design of controlled vocabularies. Bulletin of the
American Society for Information Science & Technology. October/November. Available http://www.
asis.org/Bulletin/Oct-06/mai.html
McIlwaine, I. and Broughton, Vanda. 2000. The classification research groupthen and now. Knowledge organization 27: 195-99.
Moreira, Alexandra and Alvarenga, Lidia. 2004. Thesaurus and ontology. Knowledge organization 31:
231-44.
Noy, Natalya F. and McGuinness, Deborah L.2001.
Ontology Development 101: A guide to creating
your first ontology. Available http://www.ksl. standard.edu/people/dlm/papers/ontologytutorial-noymcguinness-abstract.html.
Noy, Natalya F. and Hafner, Carole D. 1997. The
state of the art in ontology designa survey and
comparative review. AI magazine 18 no.3: 53-74.
Pejtersen, Annelise M. 1989. The BOOK House:
modeling user needs and search strategies as a basis
for system design. Roskilde, Ris National Laboratory. (Ris report M-2794).
Prieto-Daz, Ruben. 2002. A faceted approach to
building ontologies. Available https://users.cs.
jmu.edu/prietorx/Public/publications/BulidOnto
logiesRPD-ER2002.doc
Poli, Roberto. 1996. Ontology for knowledge organization. In Green, Rebecca, ed. Knowledge organization and change: Proceedings of the Fourth International ISKO Conference, Washington, DC, July 1518, 1996. Advances in knowledge organization 5.
Frankfurt/Main: Indeks Verlag, pp. 313-319.
Ranganathan, Shiyali R. 1962. Elements of library
classification. 3rd ed. New York: Asia Publishing
House.

221

Rasmussen, Jens, Pejtersen, Annelise M. and Goodstein, L. P. 1994. Cognitive systems engineering.
Wiley series in system engineering. New York:
Wiley.
Smith, Barry. 1995. Formal ontology, common sense
and cognitive science. International journal of human-computer studies 43: 641-67.
Spiteri, Louise. 1998. A simplified model for facet
analysis: Ranganathan 101. Canadian journal of
information and library science 23: 1-30. Available
http://aifia.org/pg/a_simplified_model_for_facet_
analysis.php.
Soergel, Dagobert. 1999. The rise of ontologies or
the reinvention of classification? Journal of the
American Society for Information Science 50: 111920.
Tzitzikas, Yannis, Spyratos, Nicolas, Constantopoulos, Panos and Analyti, Anastasis. 2002. Extended
faceted ontologies. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Advanced Information
Systems Engineering, pp. 778-81.
Uschold, Mike. 1996. Building ontologies: toward a
unified methodology. In Proceedings of Expert Systems, The 16th Annual Conference of the British
Computer Society Specialist Group on Expert System.
Available http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/cache/papers/
cs/3667/ftp:zSzzSzftp.aiai.ed.ac.ukzSzpubzSzdocu
mentszSz1995zSz95-ont-ijcai95-ont-method.pdf/
uschold95toward.pdf/
Uschold, Mike and Grninger, Michael. 1996. Ontologies: principles, methods and applications.
Knowledge engineering review 11: 93-155. Available
http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/uschold96ontologie.
html.
Van Heijist, G., Schreiber, Guus. and Wielinga, Bon.
1996. Using explicit ontologies in KBS development. International journal of human-computer
studies 319-25.
Vickery, Brian C. 1997. Ontologies. Journal of information science 23: 277-86.
Vicente, Kim J. 1999. Cognitive work analysis toward
safe, productive, and healthy computer-based work.
Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Zuniga, Gloria L. 2001. Ontology: its transformation
from philosophy to information systems. Paper presented at the 2nd international conference on
Formal Ontology in Information Systems
(FOIS01), Ogunquit, ME.

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


W. Dolfsma. Making Knowledge Work: Intra-firm Networks, Gifts, and Innovation

222

Making Knowledge Work:


Intra-firm Networks, Gifts, and Innovation*
Wilfred Dolfsma
University of Groningen, School of Economics and Business, PO Box 800,
9700 AV Groningen, the Netherlands, <W.A.Dolfsma@rug.nl>

Wilfred Dolfsma, economist and philosopher, holds a PhD in economics from Erasmus University. He
is professor of Innovation at the University of Groningen, Netherlands. He is corresponding editor
for the Review of Social Economy. His research interests are the interrelations between economy society and technology, media industries, feminist economics, globalisation, consumption, and the developments in and effects of IPR. His book Institutional Economics and the Formation of Preferences
(Edward Elgar 2004) won him EAEPE's Myrdal Prize. His most recent books are Knowledge Economies (Routledge 2008) and Consuming Symbolic Goods (ed., Routledge 2008).

Dolfsma, Wilfred. Making Knowledge Work: Intra-firm Networks, Gifts, and Innovation. Knowledge Organization, 35(4), 222-228. 40 references.
Abstract: Exchanging knowledge between individuals working in a firm, between but even within divisions, does not occur automatically (Szulanski 1996). It is not obvious that people exchange ideas, point each other to information that the other might
use, or give feedback, even when they have no evil motives for not cooperating in such a manner. As a firms competitive advantage is closely related to its innovative capacity, however, largely based on how it uses knowledge that is already available,
the question then is: How does knowledge flow within a firm? What can be done to stimulate or re-direct knowledge flow
within a firm?
In recent years, increasing attention is given, by scholars in social sciences in general and in management in particular, to the
networks of relations between individuals within firms involved in knowledge transfer and development. Consultancies too are
scrambling to set up units that can analyze these networks for firms. In addition to the structural issue of who relates how to
whom, I will argue that there is a need to look at why relations are established and maintained. This article thus discusses insights from both the literature on social networks and the anthropological literature on gift and favor exchange. As such, the
how and the why of knowledge transfer

* Acknowledgments: I would like to thank two anonymous referees of this journal for their comments and suggestions.

1. Knowledge flows
Different, possibly partly overlapping networks can
be distinguished, most important of which are the
formal and the informal ones. Informal contacts are
believed to stimulate knowledge flow in particular
(Cross et al. 2002, Stevenson and Gilly 1991). Figure
1 presents the informal network of people (the dots
or nodes) working in a daughter company of a large
European multinational firm in the field of electronics and electrical engineering. (This figure is from
Aalbers et al. (2006); also consult this source for a
discussion of data collection and analysis that is entailed in this kind of approach.) A similar picture

could be shown for the formal network. This company, in reformulating its corporate strategy, emphasizes cooperation between the different divisions to
stimulate innovation. Dots are individuals, and colors of the dots indicate the divisions in which the
persons are based; the circles do so as well. Figure 1
is typical in the sense that only a few individuals bear
the brunt of the entire communication flow both
within but especially between units.
A visual inspection of the network figures is illuminating, but network data can be statistically analyzed as well. Even before doing statistical analysis, it
is obvious that there is a surprisingly small number
of individuals who are involved in knowledge ex-

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


W. Dolfsma. Making Knowledge Work: Intra-firm Networks, Gifts, and Innovation

223

Figure 1. Informal network (Aalbers et al. 2006)

change across division boundaries. Only a few people thus are the linking pins or structural holes between divisions (Burt 1992). Visualizing this has caused something of a shock when senior management
at this company saw this picture. For better or for
worse, they are in a position to influence the flow of
communication to a large degree. In addition, Burt
(2004) has claimed that such individuals can come up
with new ideas themselves, combining ideas from
two or more separated fields.
In addition to such an immediate, in-your-face
finding, statistical analyses can bring out other insights and address further questions. Such analyses
can be done at the level of the network or at the level
of individuals. One example of the former approach
may be: Is the knowledge transferred within the
company primarily exchanged through formal ways,
or through informal routes? We have found (Aalbers
et al. 2006) that both these networks contribute, but
that the formal network might even contribute more
than the informal one. The formal contacts within an
organization that go beyond the organizational chart
do affect knowledge flow and thus a firms innovative capacity. An example of the latter approach, focusing on individuals within the network, could be:
does the centrality of an individual matter for knowledge exchange? Are individuals who have many con-

nections, or who connect otherwise disconnected


cliques able to tap into separated but complementary
sources of knowledge, or are they only distracted by
too frequent interactions and meetings? Substantial
work developing specialized new knowledge may be
hampered by the number of relations maintained or
because of the translations that have to be made between fields? People centrally located in the formal
structures of an organization, we have found, seem
to be better positioned to transfer knowledge between units, while people centrally located in informal interactions are better placed to transfer knowledge within units (Aalbers et al. 2006). Given that
where knowledge from diverse sources of knowledge
comes together new knowledge is more likely to be
developed (Burt 2004), formal networks set up by
management are relevent for innovation. This goes
against some of the intuition in the field of organisation studies and knowledge management today
(Granovetter 1973, Hansen 1999, Reagans and
McEvily 2003).
Increasingly there is thus recognition that certain
features of a network might suit some purposes,
while other goals are best attained if the network has
different characteristics (Reagans and McEvily 2003;
Schulz 2003; Stevenson and Gilly 1991; Kilduff and
Brass 2001). For instance, if someone working in a

224

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


W. Dolfsma. Making Knowledge Work: Intra-firm Networks, Gifts, and Innovation

firm is in need of much and diverse information, a


few close relations will not do. Employees in such a
company will need many weaker ties (Granovetter
1973). One can only maintain a limited number of
strong ties. If a firm is dependent on employees
working on a (technologically) complex issue, at the
frontier of a scientific field, there is likely to be
much tacit (taken-for-granted, unarticulated) knowledge involved. Strong ties where people have learned
to understand each other without much ado are required (Hansen 1999).
Especially in recent years, then, social network
analysis has offered a wide range of important insight into the workings of organisations, not in the
least about how people in organisations cooperate,
transfer knowledge and thus how organisations innovate.
2. Action problem
Will the knowledge that is exchanged through the
network actually be used? Will the knowledge exchanged set in motion a sustained interaction between people, possibly involving more people over
time that would benefit from the exchange, or who
might contribute to it? Network analysis has looked
primarily at the structure of exchange. Recently the
ability to exchange is discussed at length as well
(Hansen 1999), for instance in terms of tie strength.
However, the willingness to or motives for exchange
are ignored: network analysis is confronted with an
action problem (Obstfeld 2005). When will people
draw in (rather than exclude) others? The structure
of the network does not compel action, while innovation requires that dispersed individuals and knowledge is actively brought together.
One is inclined to relate this to the way in which
people are motivated: intrinsically or extrinsically.
Even though we know that the two types of motives
are possibly contradictory, and playing into one of
them might offend or put off those who are motivated by the other (Le Grand 2003), in many cases
people have more than one motive to act in a certain
way. Certainly in the case referred to above no relation between knowledge transfer on the one hand,
and the motives of people involved could be established. This leaves us with a nagging feeling: What
does resolve the action problem? When will knowledge flow within a firm, be put to work?

3. Gift Exchange
When cooperating in an innovation project, the outcome is uncertain, the relation between ones input
and the innovative output is highly obscure, and thus
the incentive to shirk is strong. No (labor) contract
will be able to cover every possible contingency. Certainly when people are called upon to be creative, the
usual command and control measures within a firm
have limited use (Hodgson 2005).
In a recent paper (Dolfsma and van der Eijk 2008)
we draw on the anthropological literature on gift exchange to tackle the action problem. We argue with
Marcel Mauss in his essay The Gift (1954) that there
is a strong obligation for people to give, accept, and
reciprocate. Those unwilling or unable to do so will
not be allowed to become a member of a community
or will be ex-communicated. Objects of material value may be given, but so may compliments, hints and
tips, pieces of information, feedback on another persons plans even if they are still in an early stage of
development. People will not give, or will not give
something of value to someone who is not part of
their group. A group may but need not equate to a
division; there can obviously be social boundaries
within a division. Giving an improper (sexist) gift
can for instance create a schism between groups
(men and women).
Ferrary (2003) reports on Silicon Valley venture
capitalists and the gifts they exchange among each
other. They are in a situation of great uncertainty
information about the options they face, the likely
outcomes of these and their chances of occurrence is
absent. These players will have to rely on the soft information they receive from people in their network.
The information given can be crucial, but its value
can only be established with hindsight.
Giving information about the students that they
have supervised to a venture capitalist that is about
to invest in the firm of these former students signals
that the Stanford professor values the relation with
the VC as well as with the former students. He may
expect something in return too, at a later date. Accepting a giftin this case information about the
former students when deciding to invest in their
venture-entails accepting the perspective of the giveran improper first gift might alienate a romantic
partner as much as it will the possible business partner in a deal among venture capitalists. A gift not given can alienate too. The core group of venture capitalists in Silicon Valley will not accept the offer of a
newly established VC firm to participate in a deal

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


W. Dolfsma. Making Knowledge Work: Intra-firm Networks, Gifts, and Innovation

(Ferrary 2003). One might find this irrational as business is foregone, but one might also interpret it as a
rational concern for their reputation that pays off in
the long run (Dolfsma 2006). Where uncertainties
abound yet where being perceived as a reliable partner is of profound importance, it pays not to do business with newly established undertakings that
might not be sufficiently embedded so as to be able
to obtain the necessary information (Podolny 1993).
However, if players view each other as belonging
to the same group, one such company failing to involve another venture capitalist in a deal, for instance
because it can handle the business itself and does not
want to share the prospective profits, will alienate
the other. The first firm will be kept out of the loop
for future deals by the other firms, even if there is a
cost involved in doing just that. Relations between
firms may be rational, but they established and maintained by concrete individuals (Child and Faulkner
1998). Rational considerations thus play an important role, as well as personal relations. Rational calculation must however remain unspoken in gift exchange.
In gift exchange, it is essential that the return gift
is not immediate. Having given in the past means
that you have credit slips outstanding, but they cannot be called on at will. A gift may never be returnedif that is the case, the relation will surely
suffer.
4. Gift Exchange and Knowledge Transfer Between
Scientists
Reciprocal gift exchange establishes a transactional
relationship between individuals (Sherry, 1983) and
allows actors to forge and personalize relationships
and to develop guarantees of personal bonding
(Zucker 1986; Shapiro 1987). As these relationships
develop and the exchange interactions progresses actors learn to cooperate with these particular others
(Starpoli 1998; Gulati 1995) and establish a common
frame of reference allowing actors to incorporate
new (tacit) knowledge (Hansen 1999; Kogut and
Zander 1992; Von Hippel 1994).
In every empirical piece of research on gift giving,
in whatever context, the Matthew Effect is found to
be true: to those who have shall be given. This may
hold in particular when the individuals who exchange
are involved in the uncertain business of knowledge
development (cf. Merton 1968). Those in a powerful
position thus receive more than others. They also give more than many others, if only because their net-

225

works tend to be more elaborate. What is an appropriate gift or what is the appropriate value of a gift
then depends on the understanding of the position
of giver, receiver and their mutual relationship.
In studies looking at what determines the success
that some corporate scientists have and others lack
some noteworthy findings emerge. Those who actively engage in the publication of papers, giving to
the scientific community at large, are more successful
than those who dont. This is, obviously, partly due
to the fact that this is a means for them to be up-tospeed with the most recent developments in their
fields, keeping their own and their organizations absorptive capacity high (Cohen and Levinthal, 1989).
There is more to this, however. These scientists claim
themselves that they also receive more from others,
working elsewhere, formally and informally, in the
form of access to scientists in other organizations and
unpublished tacit knowledge (Furukawa and Goto
2006; Hicks 1995). Most of the knowledge at the
frontier of advanced research may be tacit (Hicks
1995); such knowledge can be shared with researchers
whom one has established a longer term relationship
of trust and understanding with, a relationship of
strong ties (Hansen 1999). This active behavior in
publishing of some scientists in an organization
boosts their effectiveness within their own organizations as well. The resulting flow of knowledge encourages innovation in which they themselves and
their co-workers are involved, thereby benefiting the
organization as whole (Furukawa and Goto, 2006).
Corporate scientists, creating goodwill and establishing obligations by building a relationship of give and
take with the scientific community (Hicks 1995),
can act as technological gatekeepers and serve as a
bridge between external sources of knowledge and
their co-workers.
The story of successful corporate scientists cooperating informally through gift exchange continues.
Bouty (2000) has shown that they are involved in relations with scientists they know in other, sometimes competing, organizations helping each other
out in ways that may counter explicit organizational
regulations, and if taken advantage off could seriously hurt the organization. Still, for specific others,
laboratory tests, feed back, hints and the like are exchanged. The gift element is clear: if a person is not
known, no gifts are exchanged; if a person is not
known well, gifts of low value such as commonly
available knowledge is exchanged; if a person is
known well and for a long time very valuable knowledge can get to be exchanged. In each of these cases,

226

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


W. Dolfsma. Making Knowledge Work: Intra-firm Networks, Gifts, and Innovation

of course, no guarantee of a counter-gift, of equal value, is available. Opportunism remains possible at all
times, but would lead to excommunication and a loss
of reputation. These relations between corporate scientists within and between firms is not an unknown
observation (see Allen 1977; Kreiner and Schultz
1993; Von Hippel 1987; or the communities-ofpractice literature Wenger and Snyder 2000; Wenger
2001; Brown and Duguid 1991, 2001), but tends not
to be conceptualized in terms of gift exchange.
Even in markets where standard products are exchanged, however, gift giving is rife. One wellresearched example is that of electronic parts (Darr
2003). Sellers representatives try to build a relationship with buyers not just because they like to personally, but also to stabilize sales and to further increase
the volumes sold. Buyers hope to be kept up-to-date
about developments better than they might otherwise
(as it is not stipulated in any contract) and hope to be
given special consideration in unforeseen circumstances. Sudden additional supplies may not be available (at attractive conditions) when buyers have had a
tendency to buy on the street.
Gift exchange is more risky, can backfire more easily, but at the same time, cannot be avoided and is a
prerequisite for innovation in modern organizations.
5. Some implications for Management
While much of the academic work that is done studying networks is highly theoretical and at the same
time using complex statistical tools in their analyses,
there is an indispensable mundane element to it as
well. Pictures such as those of Figure 1 never fail to
amaze even those who have worked at the firm for
which the picture is drawn for many years: Does
communication within my firm really depend on so
few individuals? What happens when they leave? Do
these few individuals have the company goals in
mind all the time? Are the few linking pins sufficiently recognized, let alone rewarded?
What should be a relief to managers is that formal
networks within their organization does play an important role in knowledge exchange and will contribute to innovation. Setting up teams is one example of
this. Network analysis also allows one to pinpoint the
weaknesses in the communication structure of a firm:
which individuals are important for the flow of
knowledge? Are these recognized and rewarded sufficiently, or are they disgruntled? Are certain divisions
cut-off from others? Is there enough redundancy in
the networks so dependence on a single person is re-

duced? The communication profiles of people in the


organization are not necessarily those one would expect given their position. Is the staff organization
that should be stimulating innovation and exchange
among divisionsrepresented by node number 13 in
Figure 1doing a proper job? Do some people under-communicate, can their communication be redirected in a way that is more beneficial to the company? Perhaps informal relations can be build on to
develop formal relations.
The evolution of the networks over time can also
be scrutinized: are more links emerging? Is there too
much communication going on, particularly across
division boundaries, after the early phases of an innovation project have been concluded and when there should be a focus on the development of the product (Ancona and Caldwell 1992)?
But will the knowledge exchange that one would
expect given the networks that are there actually take
place? Do employees of a firm contribute to knowledge transfer to the extent that might be expected of
them, including division heads and members of staff
departments? Will the action problem be overcome
in a firm? The exchanges in a firm relating to innovation and knowledge development are best understood
as a gift exchange. Gifts of ideas, tips, feedback and
the like are typically exchanged between people in an
organization. These create bonds, trust and mutual
obligations. However, putting too much explicit emphasis on the need to exchange, on the instrumental
value of gift exchange, is counter-productive. What is
too much in one context or for one person can be
acceptable in the next. Management, finding command and control instruments of decreasing use
when it comes to persuading people to be creatively
involved, must be sensitive to possibly diverging
meanings attached by persons to contexts and signals.
From a perspective of gift exchange, the skewed nature of the knowledge exchanged in networks is not
surprising and not necessarily problematic. That those
in central positions are given much more than peripherals is to be expected. But a lack of reciprocity in
knowledge exchange leaves the firm vulnerable too. Is
a bias in the pattern of knowledge transfer introduced
because some individuals are more involved than others? Are some people out of the loop even though
they may have important knowledge to offer but they
have not been allowed or able to enter a group? These
are questions that managers may want to address, and
can only answer in the context of their organization.
People on both sides of the divide may not recognize
what the peripherals have to offer. Stimulating infor-

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


W. Dolfsma. Making Knowledge Work: Intra-firm Networks, Gifts, and Innovation

mal contacts can help, but so can making sure that


procedures for establishing the value of proposals are
formalized so as to prevent peripherals from bringing
new ideas and proposals to the table.
Formal measures and structures do seem to contribute a bit more to knowledge exchange than informal ones. Occasions can be created where people
have to give and accept, where they would want to
avoid such. Formal meetings might even be an occasion for informal relations between people to develop (Aalbers et al. 2006). Gift exchange does not
stop when the department meeting formally starts:
there is gift exchange in formal settings too (cf. Ferrary 2003). And gift exchange can continue after the
meetings if the circumstances are conducive to it.
Individuals who do not or cannot contribute to
knowledge exchange, even in formal settings, may
however hurt the firm. Was an initial meeting frustrated because gift exchange has gone bad?
Thinking this over in general terms is all good and
well, but high theory is easily forgotten when you
are stuck with you feet in the mud. Giving the problems a real feel can for instance be done by using a
teaching case where a stylized though real-life description is given. Fortunately, there are such cases in
increasing numbers. (R. Aalbers, W. Dolfsma (2004)
Crossing internal borders: Inter-divisional communication networks at Siemens Netherlands, ECCH
(RSM) teaching case 404-090-1.)
References
Aalbers, Rick, Dolfsma, Wilfred and Koppius, Otto.
2006. On and off the beaten path: exchanging
knowledge through formal and informal networks. ERIM working paper.
Allen, Thomas J. 1977. Managing the flow of technology. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.
Ancona, Deborah Gladstein and Caldwel, David F.
1992. Bridging the boundary: external activity and
performance in organizational teams. Administrative science quarterly 37: 634-65.
Boulding, Kenneth E. 1981. A preface to grants economics. New York: Praeger.
Bouty, Isabelle. 2000. Interpersonal and interaction
influences on informal resource exchanges between RandD researchers accros organizational
boundaries. Academy of Management journal 43:
50-65.
Brown, John Seely. and Duguid, Paul. 1991. Organizational learning and communities of practice.
Organization science 2: 40-57

227

2001. Knowledge and organization. Organization


science 12: 198-213.
Burt, Ronald S. 1992. Structural holes. Cambridge,
Mass.: Harvard University Press.
2004. Structural holes and new ideas. American
journal of sociology 110: 349-99.
Child, John and David Faulkner. 1998. Strategies of
cooperation. Oxford: Oxford UP.
Cross, Rob, Borgatti, Steve, and Parker, Andrew.
2002. Making invisible work visible: using social
network analysis to support human networks. California management review 44: 25-46.
Darr, Asaf. 2003. Gifting practices and interorganizational relations: constructing obligations
networks in the electronics sector. Sociological forum 18: 31-51.
Dolfsma, Wilfred. and Robert van der Eijk. 2008.
Knowledge development and coordination via
market, hierarchy and gift exchange. In J.B. Davis
ed. Social economics. London: Routledge.
Dolfsma, Wilfred. 2006. Appropriability, services and
reputation. Research policy. Forthcoming.
Ferrary, Michel. 2003. The gift exchange in the social
networks of Silicon Valley. California management
review 45: 120-38.
Furukawa, Ryuzo and Goto, Akira. 2006. The role of
corporate scientists in innovation. Research policy
35: 24-36.
Granovetter, Mark. 1973. The strength of weak ties.
American journal of sociology 78: 1360-80.
Gulati, Ranjay. 1995. Does familiarity breed trust?
Academy of Management journal 38: 85-112.
Hansen, Morten T. 1999. The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge
across organization subunits. Administrative science quarterly 44: 82-111.
Hicks, Diana. 1995. Published papers, tacit competencies and corporate management of the public/
private character of knowledge. Industrial and
corporate change 4: 40124.
Hodgson, Geoffrey Martin. 2005. Knowledge at
work. Review of social economy 63: 547-65.
Kilduff, Martin., and Brass, David J. 2001. The social
network of high and low self-monitors: implications for workplace performance. Administrative
science quarterly 46: 121-46.
Kogut, Bruce, and Zander, Udo. 1992. Knowledge of
the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Management of technology 3:
383-97.

228

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


W. Dolfsma. Making Knowledge Work: Intra-firm Networks, Gifts, and Innovation

Kreiner, Kristian, and Schultz, Majken. 1993. Informal collaboration in R&D. Organization studies
14: 189-209.
Le Grand, Julian. 2003. Motivation, agency, and public policy of knights and knaves, pawns and
queens. Oxford and New York: Oxford UP.
Mauss, Marcel. 1954 [2000]. The gift. New York:
Norton.
Merton, Robert K. 1968. The Matthew effect in science. Science 159(3819): 56-63.
Obstfeld, David. 2005 Social networks, the Tertius
Iungens orientation, and involvement in innovation. Administrative science quarterly 50: 100-30.
Podolny, Joel M. 1993. A status-based model of
market competition. American journal of sociology
98, 829-72.
Reagans, Ray, and McEvily, Bill. 2003. Network
structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of
cohesion and range. Administrative science quarterly 48: 240-67.
Schulz, Martin. 2003. Pathways of relevance: exploring inflows of knowledge into subunits of multinational corporations. Organization Science 14:
440-59.
Shapiro, Ssuan P. 1987 The social control of impersonal trust. American journal of sociology 93:
623-58.

Sherry, John F. 1983. Gift giving in anthropological


perspective. The journal of consumer research 10:
157-68.
Starpoli, Carine. 1998. Cooperation in R&D in the
pharmaceutical industry. Technovation 18: 13-23.
Stevenson, William B., and Gilly, Mary C. 1991. Information processing and problem solving: The
migration of problems through formal positions
and networks of ties. Academy of Management
journal 34: 918-28.
Szulanski, Gabriel. 1996. Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice
within the firm. Strategic management journal 17:
27-43.
Von Hippel, Eric. 1994. Sticky information and the
locus of problem solving. Management science 40:
429-39.
Wenger, Etienne C., and Snyder, William. 2000.
Communities of practice: the organizational frontier. Harvard business review 78: 139-45.
Wenger, Etienne C. 1998. Communities of practice.
Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
Zucker, LynneG. 1986. Production of trust: Institutional sources of economic structure, 1840-1920.
Research in organizational behavior 8: 53-111.

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


B. Christensen. Minoritization vs. Universalization: Lesbianism and Male Homosexuality in LCSH and LCC

229

Minoritization vs. Universalization:


Lesbianism and Male Homosexuality
in LCSH and LCC
Ben Christensen
4747 30th Ave NE Apt J169, Seattle, WA, USA, 98105,
<bgchris@u.washington.edu>

Ben Christensen received a master of library and information science degree from the University of Washington in
2008 and also holds bachelor's and master's degrees in English from Brigham Young University. He currently works
as the information specialist for Isocrat.org, an LGBTQ information resource, sociopolitical advocate, debate forum,
and support community. He worked previously for four years in public and academic library reference and for a
year as a volunteer media cataloger at the University of Washington Libraries. He is the author of Getting
Out/Staying In: One Mormon Straight/Gay Marriage, published in Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought.

Christensen, Ben. Minoritization vs. Universalization: Lesbianism and Male Homosexuality in


LCSH and LCC. Knowledge Organization, 35(4), 229-238. 13 references.
Abstract: In 1990 Ellen Greenblatt published a study of gay- and lesbian-related terms in the Library of Congress Subject
Headings. No such study has been published since, nor has such a study been conducted on the Library of Congress Classification system. This article returns to Greenblatts LCSH study to see what progress has been made in the last two decades, then
uses her study as a template to examine gay- and lesbian-related terminology in LCC. Greenblatts objections to then-current
headings are examples of a tension defined in the research of Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick and later Grant Campbell: between a
universalizing view, which values unmarked representation of all parts of the population as a whole, and a minoritizing view
like Greenblatts, which values visibility for the minority at any cost. Catalogers and classificationists should be aware of this
tension and respectful of current preferred usage of the minority group being represented.

1. Introduction
In his application of Eve Kosofsky Sedgwicks (1990)
theories of human sexuality to bibliographic access
tools, Grant Campbell posits that survival within a
marginalized group depends on the regular and frequent subversion of traditional classification categories (2000, 127). In the world of American libraries,
there is no set of classification categories more traditional than the Library of Congresss Subject Headings and Classification systems (heretofore referred to
as LCSH and LCC, respectively), and yet little has
been done to subvert the categories assumed by these
systems in regard to one of the most marginalized
groups in contemporary America, lesbians and gay
men. One of the few systematic analysesand certainly the most thoroughof the representation of
lesbianism and male homosexuality in LCSH is Ellen
Greenblatts Homosexuality: The Evolution of a

Concept in The Library of Congress Subject Headings, published in 1990. A comparable analysis of gay
and lesbian concepts represented in LCC is notably
absent from library and information science literature,
perhaps because LCC and its underlying structure and
terminology is not quite so visible to library users and
therefore the potential for offense seems to be lesser
In this article I will follow up on Greenblatts study,
noting changes relevant to her critique that have been
made in the past two decades. Then I will take the
complaints Greenblatt raised against LCSH and see
how LCC holds up to the same criticism, looking at
Greenblatt, LCSH, and LCC through the lens of the
minoritizing vs. universalizing concept Campbell
adopts from Sedgwick. In the process I hope to show
that it is just as important to avoid unintentional biaseswhether against homosexuality in general or lesbians specificallyin LCC as it is in LCSH, as these
biases also have an impact on the user.

230

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


B. Christensen. Minoritization vs. Universalization: Lesbianism and Male Homosexuality in LCSH and LCC

2. Greenblatt and LCSH


Greenblatt proposes two changes to then-current
headings and seven new headings. Of these, two partial changes have been made and six headings added,
most of which may be considered a sort of compromise between the old status quo and Greenblatts suggestions. The first change she proposes is that all instances of Gay or Gays referring inclusively to homosexual men and women be replaced with Lesbian and
gay or Lesbians and gay men, respectively. So while the
noun Gays would become Lesbians and gay men, adjectival uses such as Gay youth would be replaced with
Lesbian and gay youth. Greenblatt notes that gay as an
umbrella term referring to women as well as men is no
longer reflective of current usage, as indicated by the
number of gay- and lesbian-oriented groups that have
consciously changed their names to incorporate both
terms (1990, 85). LCSH, meanwhile, continues to use
the noun Gays, which includes the narrower terms
Gay men and Lesbians. Adjectival uses of the term inconsistently employ gay to mean gay male, lesbian and
gay, or both. Gay nurses and Gay youth list as narrower terms Lesbian nurses and Lesbian youth, respectively, but not Gay male nurses or Gay male youth.
Gay liberation movement, Gay rights, and Gay Pride
Day are to be used for Gay and lesbian liberation
movement, Gay and lesbian rights, and Gay and Lesbian Pride Day, respectively. To be fair, the last is reflective of current usagea Google search for gay
pride day returns nearly one hundred times as many
results as gay and lesbian pride day.
A few changes reflective of Greenblatts proposal
have been made: in 1995 the term Gay and lesbian
studies was added to LCSH. Interestingly, though,
this term is not intended to complement the terms
Gay studies and Lesbian studies; rather the broader
term has replaced the more specific terms. This
means that works on lesbian studies, works on gay
studies, and works on both will all be lumped together under one heading. The same is true of Gay
and lesbian dance parties and Gay and lesbian film festivals, which are both meant to replace the equivalent
terms using only the adjective gay, with neither use
for nor narrower term references to equivalent
headings modified only by lesbian . How does this
satisfy the bibliographic need for specificity? In
these cases it seems LC has taken one step forward
and two steps back.
The second change Greenblatt suggests is from
Aged lesbians to Senior lesbians. She explains that this
change is advocated due to age-related bias, rather

than heterosexist bias (1990, 86). Apparently recognizing the age bias of the term aged, LC has replaced it, but with older rather than Greenblatts
proposed senior. In light of the previous complaint,
its notable that Older lesbians is considered a narrower term of Older gays.
The first new heading, or rather pair of headings,
that Greenblatt proposes is Gay menComing out
and LesbiansComing out. She points out that the
coming out process is an important element of gay
and lesbian discourse, that many gays and lesbians in
the midst of this process turn to libraries and books
for support, and, most importantly as far as LC is
concerned, there is literary warrant within the LC collection. Again, LC has responded to this need but
used a slightly different heading. In 1990, the same
year Greenblatts paper was written and published, the
subject heading Coming out (Sexual orientation) was
added, followed later by the narrower term Coming
out (Sexual orientation) in literature. The difference
between Greenblatts proposed terms and the one
chosen by LCSH points back to differing philosophiesit is important to Greenblatt to highlight the
differences between the gay male and lesbian experiences, while whoever is responsible for this particular
subject heading is content to group them together.
Greenblatts second proposed addition is Gay Holocaust (1939-1945). The concept has been added, but
is represented as GaysNazi persecution. A note on
the subjects record indicates that this decision was influenced by a 1998 Washington Blade article entitled
Researcher says Nazi persecution not systematic,
indicating that while many gay men were tortured and
killed by Nazis, there was no systematic Gay Holocaust, per se (Library of Congress). Here the nonpreferred terms Gay menNazi persecution and Nazi
persecution of gay men, as well as the fact that the notes
refer specifically to homosexual men, seem to indicate that Gays means gay men, as opposed to its inclusive uses elsewhere in LCSH. This question of terminology, then, is not only a question of current usage,
but also of consistency and disambiguation. How can
a user of LCSH know when gays means one thing and
when it means another?
The third new heading Greenblatt proposes is Heterosexuality. She cites literary warrant and the following quote from lesbian feminist Marilyn Frye
(quoted in Greenblatt 1990, 91):
One of the privileges of being normal and ordinary is a certain unconsciousness. When one
is that which is taken as the norm in ones so-

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


B. Christensen. Minoritization vs. Universalization: Lesbianism and Male Homosexuality in LCSH and LCC

cial environment, one does not have to think


about it. If one is the norm, one does not
have to know what one is. If one is marginal,
one does not have the privilege of not noticing
what one is.
Less than four years after Greenblatts paper, Heterosexuality was added to LCSH. The fact that Homosexuality and Bisexuality were subject headings long
before Heterosexuality was is representative of this
unconsciousness of the majoritythat which is considered normal does not have to be labeled. As I will
discuss in more depth below, the logic calling for heterosexuality to be named is not unrelated to the logic
calling for lesbianism to be separated from male homosexuality; these are two sides of the same coin.
The fourth and fifth of Greenblatts proposed additions, Lesbian feminism and Lesbian separatism,
stem from the same driving force. In this case it is
not the larger group of homosexuality from which
she wishes to differentiate lesbianism, but the larger
groups of feminism and separatism from which she
wishes to differentiate the lesbian aspects of these
concepts. Lesbian feminism has been added to
LCSH; Lesbian separatism has not.
Parents of lesbians and gay men, Greenblatts sixth
proposal, is a call for greater specificity based on literary warrant. LC responded to the literary warrant,
but again lacking the specific terminology Greenblatt prefers: Parents of gays was added in 2002.
Greenblatts final proposed addition, Violence
against gay men and lesbians, is based not only in specificity of gender terminology but also in clarity of
meaning. The subject headings commonly assigned
for works on violence against gay men and lesbians
at the time of Greenblatts writing were HomosexualsCrimes against and Gay menCrimes against.
Not only do these headings marginalize or exclude
lesbians, but they are also misleading, as those who
perform violent acts against lesbians and gay men are
often not convicted of any crime. In 2005 the preformed heading GaysViolence against was added,
addressing the latter objection, and the free-floating
subdivision Violence against has been available for
use as a topical subdivision under classes of persons
and ethnic groups since 1999, allowing for at least
the option of recognizing violence against lesbians.
3. Greenblatts Standards Applied to LCC
Before applying Greenblatts criticisms of LCSH to
LCC, its important to recognize that LCC is an en-

231

tirely different beast. Although LCSH and LCC have


in essence grown up togetherLCSH began as a list
of subject headings developed by the Library of Congress toward the end of the nineteenth century and
was first published in 1914 (Chan 1994, 171), while
LCC Class Z, the first of the classes to be formed, was
adopted in 1898 and published in 1902 (Chan 1994,
328)the two are very different in form and function.
LCSH is a unified vocabulary of terms chosen to represent the subjects of the Library of Congresss collection. In theory, at least, terms and concepts exist in a
one-to-one ratio in LCSH; there is only one preferred
term for each discrete concept and only one concept
described by each preferred term. Terms are connected
to each other through hierarchical relationships represented by NT (narrower term), BT (broader term),
RT (related term), UF (use for), and USE crossreferences. While cataloguing librarians all over the
world propose new or changed headings to LCSH,
these changes are regulated by a single governing body. LCC, on the other hand, is a set of twenty-one
classes developed by different groups of specialists.
There is no common index or controlled vocabulary
across the classes. Even within a single class different
terms may be used to describe the same concept in
different places. Here the hierarchical structure, denoted by the place in the notation scheme as well as
the arrangement of the schedules, is more important
than the terminology. The terminology is invisible to
the end userits primary purpose is to guide the cataloger or classifier in choosing a notation. As we will
see, though, the language of the headings, invisible as
it may be, still matters.
In Table 1 below, Ive placed Ellen Greenblatts
proposed changes to LCSH next to the current headings in LCSH and their equivalents in LCC. In cases where there is not a close equivalent in LCC or
when the seeming equivalent is not the notation actually used in conjunction with the subject heading,
Ive entered the heading for the notation that is used
most commonly for materials with the indicated
subject heading. In these cases the heading has an asterisk (*) before it. As the concept represented by
the subject heading Gays is very general and is represented throughout LCC in a variety of forms, Ive listed all of these terms with the number of occurrences of each term in the LCC schedules in parentheses. In addition, Ive put the terms from both
LCSH and LCC that I believe match up with
Greenblatts recommendations in bold, in order to
highlight the differences between the two systems. I
will discuss these in more detail below.

232

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


B. Christensen. Minoritization vs. Universalization: Lesbianism and Male Homosexuality in LCSH and LCC

Greenblatt

LCSH

LCC

Lesbians and gay men (instead of


Gays)

Gays

*Homosexuality. Lesbianism
Gay men and lesbians (3)
Gay men. Lesbians (4)
Gays. Lesbians (3)
Homosexuality. Gays. Lesbians (1)
Gays. Lesbians. Homosexuals (1)
Homosexuals (9; 1 of which lists Gay men and
Lesbians as non-preferred terms with See references, and 1 that lists Gays as a nonpreferred term with a See reference)
Gays (29; 4 of which offer Lesbians as an equivalent term)
Homosexuality. Gays (2)
Gay nurses. Lesbian nurses

Gay nurses (NT Lesbian nurses)

Senior lesbians (instead of Aged lesbians)


Gay menComing out, Lesbians
Coming out
Gay Holocaust
Heterosexuality (complementary to
Homosexuality and Bisexuality)

Gay youth (NT Lesbian


youth)
Gay and lesbian studies (UF
Lesbian studies; UF Gay
studies)
Gay and lesbian dance parties (UF Gay dance parties)
Gay and lesbian film festivals
(UF Gay film festivals)
Gay liberation movement
(UF Gay and lesbian liberation movement; UF Lesbian liberation movement)
Gay rights (UF Gay and lesbian rights; UF Lesbian
rights)
Gay Pride Day (UF Gay and
Lesbian Pride Day)
Older lesbians (UF Aged lesbians [Former Heading])
Coming out (Sexual orientation)
GaysNazi persecution
Heterosexuality

Homosexuality

Bisexuality
Lesbian feminism

Lesbian feminism

Lesbian separatism
Parents of lesbians and gay men

-Parents of gays (UF Parents


of gay men)
GaysViolence against

Violence against gay men and lesbians

Gay youth. Lesbian youth


Gay and lesbian studies

--Homosexuality. LesbianismGay rights movement. Gay liberation movement. Homophile


movement
Homosexuality. LesbianismGay rights movement. Gay liberation movement. Homophile
movement
*Homosexuality. Lesbianism
Middle-aged lesbians. Older lesbians
*Homosexuality. LesbianismGeneral works
*HolocaustOther victim groups, A-ZGays
Heterosexuality (added 7 Nov. 2007; previously
represented as The Family. Marriage. WomanSexual lifeSexual behavior and attitudes. SexualityGeneral)
The Family. Marriage. WomanHuman sexuality. SexSexual minoritiesHomosexuality.
Lesbianism
The Family. Marriage. WomanHuman sexuality. SexSexual minoritiesBisexuality
*Lesbianism
*Feminism
-Parents of gay men or lesbians
*Victims of crimes. VictimologySpecial classes
of persons, A-ZHomosexuals

Table 1. Ellen Greenblatts Proposed Headings vs. Current LSCH and LCC Headings

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


B. Christensen. Minoritization vs. Universalization: Lesbianism and Male Homosexuality in LCSH and LCC

A quick glance at the table shows a concentration of


bold LCC headings in the top right, corresponding
to Greenblatts Lesbians and gay men, and a greater
number of bold LCSH headings in the bottom middle, corresponding to her other suggested headings.
This points to a stronger trend in LCC than LCSH
of unambiguous gender inclusion and less of an emphasis in LCC than LCSH on representing specific
aspects of homosexuality. This may be reflective of
the distinct purposes of the two systems: LCCs
terminology makes it clear to cataloging librarians
that whether the work at hand is about gay men or
lesbians, it is covered by the classification that includes both terms, while the greater variety of gayand lesbian-related subject headings in LCSH delineate for users the many narrower topics an item classified under homosexuality might be about. In
most library systems that use LCC and LCSH, only
one class number is chosen for each item while many
subject headings may be applied, calling for more
specific subject headings and broader class numbers.
For the terms referring to lesbians and gay men
generally, Ive bolded those that make an explicit distinction between gay men and lesbians, such as Homosexuality. Lesbianism, Gay nurses. Lesbian nurses,
and Gay and lesbian studies. Although several of these
terms, such as Gays. Lesbians, use the ambiguous
gays, its complementary juxtaposition with lesbians
makes it clear that it refers specifically to gay men. It
should also be noted that while there are a greater
number of explicitly gender-inclusive LCC terms in
this section, the ambiguous Homosexuals and Gays
are distributed throughout the schedules with a much
higher frequency. As Greenblatt points out, the term
homosexual as a noun is not only ambiguous but it is
outdated; she cites a work on nonsexist terminology
that states that gays and lesbians alike reject the term
as alien, clinical, and much too limiting to properly
denote a whole lifestyle (quoted in Greenblatt 1990,
86). Its particularly interesting to note that of the
nine occurrences of Homosexuals in the LCC schedules, in one position Gay men and Lesbians are also listed on the same level of the hierarchy but with See
references to Homosexuals, and in another Gays is listed with the same cross-reference. The preference of
the term that goes against current usage, then, is someones conscious choiceperhaps in an attempt to
acknowledge changes in terminology while remaining
consistent with previously assigned class numbers.
The problem with the term Gays is that its meaning is unclear. It is commonly used to mean gay men,
as reflected in the four places in the LCC schedules

233

where it is listed adjacent to Lesbians, but it is also


usedcontrary to most lesbians wishes, according to
Greenblattto mean gay men and lesbians. Because
LCC is not a classification system that attempts to
classify all knowledge but rather a finite system based
on the literary warrant of the LC collection, its difficult to say in the twenty-three places where Gays occurs without an adjacent Lesbians whether the term is
meant to include both men and women or if its just
that up to this point all the books that LC has classified on this particular topic have been exclusively
about gay men. When LC catalogers come across a
book focusing on lesbians in a discipline and subject
area where there is not yet a notation corresponding
to lesbians, will they assume the already-existing Gays
includes lesbians or will they assume a new notation
needs to be created? Furthermore, when there is a
heading for Gays meaning gay men and another for
Lesbians, a work on both gay men and lesbians is likely to receive the notation corresponding to the seemingly-inclusive Gays. This is exacerbated by the fact
that subdivisions are often broken down not by logical hierarchies but alphabetically, meaning that between the notation corresponding to Gays and the
notation corresponding to Lesbians there may well be
notations for Grandparents, Hispanic Americans, Infants, Joggers, and Latvians. This easily translates into
several shelves of books, meaning the user looking
for lesbian literature is less likely to come across the
gay and lesbian collection classified under gay literature. This is a problem with multi-topical works regardless of the terms used, but in this case the ambiguous terms will influence catalogers to classify
with a bias toward the gay side of the gay/lesbian divide rather than based strictly on the content.
LCC is notably lacking in notations reflecting
Greenblatts proposed terms Gay menComing out,
LesbiansComing out, Lesbian feminism, Lesbian separatism, and Violence against gay men and lesbians.
All of these concepts tend to be classified under more generic notations like that for Homosexuality. LesbianismGeneral works. Items with the subject heading GaysViolence against are most commonly
classified in HV6250.4.H66, which refers to homosexuals as a class of victims of crimes; again, the question of whether violence and crime can be treated as
synonyms is raised. The concept equivalent to Gay
Holocaust, consistent with LCSHs decision not to
classify it as a discrete event, is classed under HolocaustOther victim groups, A-ZGays.
Until very recentlyNovember of 2007the
concept heterosexuality was not represented in LCC.

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


B. Christensen. Minoritization vs. Universalization: Lesbianism and Male Homosexuality in LCSH and LCC

234

Even more telling than the absence of the concept is


where books on this subject were placed in the schedules, as opposed to those on homosexuality or bisexuality. While books about heterosexuality were
classed as SexualityGeneral, those about homosexuality or bisexuality were classed by these terms,
which fall under Sexual minorities in the hierarchy.
Thus the minority or other status of homo- and
bisexuality were emphasized in contrast to the general or normal status of heterosexuality. The hierarchy has been adjusted a bit now with the addition
of Heterosexuality, but even now its majority status
is emphasized by its position parallel to Sexual minorities, which includes both Bisexuality and Homosexuality. Lesbianism.
Table 1 and my discussion thus far contain a fallacy I alluded to at the beginning of this section
they speak of LCC as if it were a unified whole,
rather than the disparate parts it is made of. With
that in mind, Ive listed in Table 2 the various gayand lesbian-related terms found throughout LCC by
the subclasses where they appear. Again, Ive bolded
the terms that seem to fit Greenblatts ideal of unambiguous gender inclusion, whether by themselves
or in conjunction with other terms at the same level
of the hierarchywhen Lesbians appears adjacent to
Gays, for example, I consider the combination to be
unambiguously inclusive. Classes, indicated by the
first letter of the subclass, are differentiated by alternating blocks of gray and white in order to highlight
the larger trends.
SC

Term

BF
BF
BF
BL
BL
BM
BP
BX
BR
BS

Homosexuality
Gay men
Gays
Homosexuality
Gays
Homosexuality. Gays. Lesbians
Homosexuality
Homosexuality
Homosexuality
Homosexuality (with Lesbianism offered as
a complementary term at the same level of the
hierarchy)
Gay interpretations
Lesbianism
Gays
Gays. Lesbians. Homosexuals
Gays, Services for
Homosexuality (with Lesbianism offered as
a complementary term at the same level of the
hierarchy)

BS
BS
BV
BV
BV
BX

SC

Term

BX
BX
BX
BX
BX
D
D
GN
GV
GV
GV
HD
HD
HE
HF
HQ
HQ
HQ
HQ
HQ
HQ
HQ
HQ
HQ
HQ

Homosexuality. Gay rights


Homosexuals
Gay marriage
Lesbianism
Lesbians
Gays
Gays. Gay military participation
Homosexuality
Gay and lesbian dance parties
Gay Games
Gay men. Lesbians
Gay business enterprises
Gays. Lesbians
Homosexuals
Vocational guidance for gays
Homosexuality. Lesbianism
Gay and lesbian culture
Gay and lesbian studies
Gay conservatives
Gay fathers
Gay men
Gay parents
Gay press publications
Gay pride parades
Gay rights movement. Gay liberation movement. Homophile movement
Lesbian mothers
Lesbians
Middle-aged lesbians. Older lesbians
Middle-aged gay men. Older gay men
Parents of gay men or lesbians
Special classes of gay people, A-Z
Children of gay parents
Same-sex divorce. Gay divorce
Older gays
Homophobia. Heterosexism
Lesbianism
Homosexuals
Gay and lesbian adoption
Gay men. Lesbians
Gay youth. Lesbian youth
Gays
Alcohol and gay people
Deaf gays
Homosexuality
Homosexual men and women
Gays
Gays. Lesbians
Gays
Gays
Gays. Lesbians
Gay men. Lesbians
Gays

HQ
HQ
HQ
HQ
HQ
HQ
HQ
HQ
HQ
HQ
HS
HV
HV
HV
HV
HV
HV
HV
HX
JK
K
KB
KE
KF
KF
KJ
KJ

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


B. Christensen. Minoritization vs. Universalization: Lesbianism and Male Homosexuality in LCSH and LCC

235

SC

Term

SC

Term

KJ
KJ
KK
KK
KK

Sodomy. Homosexual acts. Homosexualit


Same-sex marriage. Mariage des homosexuels
Homosexuals
Lesbians
Sodomy. Homosexual acts. Unzucht zwischen
Mnnern
Gay teachers
Homosexuality and education
Gays. Lesbians. Bisexuals
Children of gay parents
Gays
Gay music
Homosexuality
Homosexuality
Gay artists. Lesbian artists
Lesbians
Homosexuality
Gays
Homosexuality
Homosexuality, Male
Gay men
Homosexuality. Gays
Homosexuality
Homosexuality
Homosexuality (with Lesbianism offered as
a complementary term at the same level of the
hierarchy)
Homosexuality. Gays
Gay and lesbian film festivals
Gay authors
Gay men
Gay theater
Gays (with Lesbians offered as a complementary term at the same level of the hierarchy)
Lesbian theater
Lesbianism
Lesbians
Homosexuality (with Lesbians offered as a
complementary term at the same level of the
hierarchy)
Homosexuals
Homosexuals, Male
Gays
Lesbians
Homosexuality (with Lesbianism offered as
a complementary term at the same level of the
hierarchy)
Gay men
Gays (with Lesbians offered as a complementary term at the same level of the hierarchy)
Lesbianism
Lesbians

PS

Homosexuality (with Lesbianism offered as


a complementary term at the same level of the
hierarchy)
Gay authors
Gay culture
Gays (with Lesbians offered as a complementary term at the same level of the hierarchy)
Lesbianism
Lesbians
Homosexuality
Gay men
Lesbianism
Sexual orientation. Homosexuality
Homosexuality
Gay nurses. Lesbian nurses
Homosexuals
Lesbians
Gay men
Gay men and lesbians
Gay psychiatrists. Gay psychotherapists. Lesbian psychiatrists. Lesbian psychotherapists
Female homosexuality. Lesbianism
Male homosexuality
Gay and lesbian teenagers
Homosexuals
Gays
Gays
Homosexuality
Homosexuality. Lesbianism. Gay and lesbian
studies
Homosexual men and women, and health
Gay men and lesbians
Gays
Lesbian libraries
Lesbianism

LB
LC
LC
LC
M
ML
N
NX
NX
NX
P
P
PA
PA
PE
PG
PJ
PL
PN

PN
PN
PN
PN
PN
PN

PN
PN
PN
PQ

PQ
PQ
PQ
PQ
PR

PR
PR

PR
PR

PS
PS
PS

PS
PS
PT
PT
PT
QP
R
R
RA
RA
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RJ
TR
UB
VB
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z

It would be fruitless, at least for my present purposes,


to compare quantities across the classeseach class
represents a discipline, and again LCC headings and
notations are determined by literary warrant, so of
course the H (social sciences) and P (language and literature) classes are going to have a greater number of
gay- and lesbian-themed headings than the other classes. It is also logical that H and P, being the two classes
that deal most extensively with homosexuality, are relatively up-to-date and inclusive in the language used.
In the Ps, for instance, almost every occurrence of
Gays or Homosexuality is accompanied by an equivalent Lesbians or Lesbianism, thus clarifying that the
former terms refer specifically to men. (As noted above, though, the use of Gays or Homosexuality here instead of Gay men or Male homosexuality is likely to

236

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


B. Christensen. Minoritization vs. Universalization: Lesbianism and Male Homosexuality in LCSH and LCC

lead to items about men and women being grouped


together with the items about men only.) What is more interesting is the classes that perhaps dont treat
homosexuality and lesbianism so extensively, but where unambiguously inclusive language is used. The two
that stand out to me are R (medicine) and Z (bibliography and library science).
4. Greenblatt, Campbell, and Sedgwick
Thus far Ive taken Ellen Greenblatts value system
favoring lesbian and gay over gay, along with heterosexuality over an unstated assumption of normalcy,
for granted. Grant Campbell would probably not do
so. Campbells analysis of homosexuality in bibliographic access tools relies heavily on the tension between two viewpoints that Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick
(1990, 1) defines as
the contradiction between seeing homo/heterosexual definition on the one hand as an issue
of active importance primarily for a small, distinct, relatively fixed homosexual minority
(what I refer to as a minoritizing view), and
seeing it on the other hand as an issue of continuing, determinative importance in the lives
of people across the spectrum of sexualities
(what I refer to as a universalizing view).
Campbell (2000, 129) elaborates on this tension between minoritizing and universalizing as it applies to
classification:
If the gay community is split between two concepts of survivalintegration into a universal
whole and separation into a visible minority
then a classification system will have to negotiate that split. The universalizing tendency will
tend to treat explicit subject headings with suspicion. [] The universalizing approach implies that the explicit presence of a topic in a
subject access system implies a deviation from
the norm. The minoritizing view, on the other
hand, may well argue [] for visibility at any
cost; Id rather have negative than nothing.
The difference between the minoritizing and universalizing views as they apply to classification can be
summed up as a question of marked or unmarked
representation. The minoritizing view calls for marked representation, terminology and hierarchical structure that draw attention to difference, making the

part stand out from the whole. The universalizing


view, on the other hand, calls for unmarked representation, terminology and hierarchical structure that
dont call attention to differences, emphasizing instead the unified whole.
Whereas Campbell is speaking of the universalization and minoritization of homosexuality in the context of the general population, Greenblatt is more
concerned with lesbianism within the context of homosexuality. Despite the different focus, the same
tension exists: Should lesbianism be integrated into
the universal whole of homosexuality or should it be
separated into a visible minority? Whether in this
primary argument for the explicit inclusion of gender
in terms related to homosexuality or in her secondary
argument for the explicit inclusion of sexual orientation in terms related to heterosexuality, Greenblatt is
on the side of minoritizationvisibility at any cost.
In both cases, its a question of which facets we highlight and which we ignore. Just as ignoring the sexuality facet of that which is not explicitly homosexual
implies heterosexuality as the norm, ignoring the
gender of that which is not explicitly lesbian implies
male homosexuality as the norm. If the ambiguous
term gays swallows up the specific terms lesbians and
gay men, she argues, lesbians are hidden in the assumed male world of gays. If homosexuality is explicitly present in LCSH but heterosexuality is not, homosexuality becomes a deviation from the norm.
After examining these inherent conflicts in bibliographic access to gay and lesbian materials, Campbell
(2000, 130) concludes:
Community members [] want to belong and
to remain apart. By acknowledging these inevitable ambiguities, classification researchers will
be well-positioned to create new, better subject
access tools. But they will do so only by acknowledging that the tough questions are here
to stay, and that complexity, debate and controversy can be negotiated, but not banished.
The tensions between heterosexual and homosexual,
between gay and lesbian, are not going anywhere. No
perfect classification system will make them disappear.
Ellen Greenblatts criticism of the Library of Congress Subject Headings sheds light not only on the potential problems in LCSH but also in LCC. We should
not, however, forget that Greenblatt represents only
one side of the debate; while Greenblatt calls for the
minoritization of lesbianism and male homosexuality,
there are those in and out of the gay and lesbian com-

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


B. Christensen. Minoritization vs. Universalization: Lesbianism and Male Homosexuality in LCSH and LCC

munity who argue for the opposite, and the Library of


Congress, in its role providing classification and subject headings for libraries across the nation, would not
do well to ignore either side.
5. Change Based on Current Usage
In a paper discussing the use of faceted classification
to provide access to gay and lesbian information resources, Campbell (2004) suggests that to do so effectively one must first understand how lesbians and gay
men categorize themselves and their own knowledge
domains. He cites Hjrland (1997, 9), who says that
knowledge of an individual person, his benefits from
information systems, and the problems and barriers he
meets in the utilization of knowledge [] are illuminated by the knowledge of the social background of
the person, his social roles and working commitments,
his educational background, and his cooperative relationships. But what of a group made up of thousands
and thousands of individuals whose backgrounds,
roles, commitments, and relationships are each
unique? How can we definitively state how lesbians
and gay men categorize themselves? Hjrland says
that human concepts primarily emerge as a result of
human cooperation and communication, and so individual structures of knowledge can only be understood from a collective analysis (9). We may not be
able to define how each and every lesbian or gay man
categorizes her or himself, but we can approximate the
self-categorization of the collective LGBT (lesbian,
gay, bisexual, and transgendered) community through
an analysis of the terminology they use when cooperating and communicating among themselves and with
the world at large.
In this case, even a cursory glance at the titles of
gay- and lesbian-themed publications reveals a trend
toward minoritization (such as Journal of GLBT
Family Studies, Journal of Gay & Lesbian Social Services, and GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies) over universalization (such as the now-defunct
Gay Community News). In a 2002 article for the
Journal of Gay & Lesbian Psychotherapy, Holly Devor presents the case for addressing the concerns of
transgendered people along with those of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and queer people in LGBT groups
(2002, 5). More recently, articles in peer-reviewed
journals as diverse as the Journal of Teacher Education (Macgillivray 2008), The American Journal of
Public Health (Corliss 2007), and the Journal of
Homosexuality (Lovaas 2006) have all used the phrase lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender when re-

237

ferring to sexual minorities as a whole. This is only a


surface sampling of an overwhelming majority of
scholarly literature in and outside the LGBT community that favors terminology that separates the
lesbian (and bisexual and transgender) from the gay.
Even the term queer, frequently used as a universalizing term to encompass all non-standard sexualities,
is more often than not swallowed up as a single Q in a
string of letters representing the various minorities individually (such as GLBTQIA: Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual,
Transgender, Queer, Intersex, Asexual). This hesitance
to use queer as an umbrella term encompassing these
others rather than as a parallel term alongside them
comes down to a question of identity politics, as described in Sally ODriscolls (1996) examination of the
tension between queer theory and lesbian and gay studies.
Given this context, Greenblatts request that
LCSH recognize lesbians as an entity separate from
gay men is entirely appropriate. If the various LCC
schedules are to reflect current usage, they should also adopt this minoritizing view. Thanks to the living
and constantly changing nature of both the subject
heading and classification schedules, this kind of improvement is not only possible, but has historical
precedent. While Library of Congress catalogers cannot be expected to keep on top of the evolving needs
of users from every minority group across the country, the Subject Authority Cooperative Program
(SACO) of the Program for Cooperative Cataloging
(PCC) allows participating catalogers from other institutions to propose changes and additions to LCSH
and LCC. This process is augmented by the impetus
created by people like Greenblatt, Campbell, and Sanford Berman, whose 1971 tract on LC subject headings concerning people has led to improvements in
subject headings that formerly reflected racist, sexist,
heterosexist, ageist, and other biases. In the case of
lesbianism and male homosexuality in LCSH and
LCC, as with other areas, there is still work to be
done and likely always will be. To have a thesaurus
and classification system that reflect current terminology and ideologies is not an end result but an ongoing process that requires constant vigilance on the
part of catalogers, other librarians and scholars, and
library users.
6. Conclusion
Although the terminology used in classification
schedules is not as visible to the end user as subject
headings are, biases and prejudices can be just as vi-

238

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


B. Christensen. Minoritization vs. Universalization: Lesbianism and Male Homosexuality in LCSH and LCC

sible. When choosing this terminology and its place


in the hierarchy, we should keep in mind the different groups of people these terms represent, whether
homosexual or heterosexual, gay or lesbian. We
should also keep in mind that the people who make
up each of these groups may have nothing more than
sexual orientation in common, meaning that individuals will vary greatly in how they wish to be representedas invisible parts of a unified whole or as
visible minorities in a fractured multitude. Keeping
up with current connotations and usages of various
terms wont ensure we please everyone, as theres no
denying thats impossible, but it will allow us to classify and describe concepts in a way consistent with
current usage and with as much respect as possible
to the various people these terms describe.
References
Berman, Sanford. 1971. Prejudices and atinpathies: a
tract on the LC subject heads concerning people.
Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press.
Campbell, D. Grant. 2000. Queer theory and the
creation of contextual subject access tools for gay
and lesbian communities. Knowledge organization
27: 122-31.
Campbell, D. Grant. 2004. A queer eye for the faceted guy: how a universal classification principle
can be applied to a distinct subculture. In McIlwaine, Ia C. ed. Knowledge organization and the
global information society: Proceedings of the Eighth
International ISKO Conference, London, England,
July 13-16, 2004. Advances in knowledge organization 9. Wrzburg: Ergon Verlag, pp. 109-13.
Chan, Lois Mai. 1994. Cataloging and classification:
An introduction. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Corliss, Heather L., Michael D. Shankle, and Matthew B. Moyer. 2007. Research, curricula, and resources related to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender health in US schools of public health. The
American journal of public health 97: 1023-27.
Devor, Holly. 2002. Who are we?: where sexual orientation meets gender identity. Journal of gay &
lesbian psychotherapy 6: 5-21.
Greenblatt, Ellen. 1990. Homosexuality: the evolution of a concept in the Library of Congress Subject Headings. In Cal Gough and Ellen Greenblatt, eds. Gay and lesbian library service. Jefferson, N.C.: McFarland, pp. 75-101.
Hjrland, Birger. 1997. Information seeking and subject representation: an activity-theoretical approach
to information science. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press.
Library of Congress. 2003. Subjects record: Gays
Nazi persecution. Retrieved June 6, 2007, from
Classification Web database. <http://classification
web.net/>
Lovaas, Karen E., John P. Elia, and Gust A. Yep.
2006. Shifting ground(s): surveying the contested
terrain of LGBT studies and queer theory. Journal
of homosexuality 52: 1-18.
Macgillivray, Ian K., and Todd Jennings. 2008. A
content analysis exploring lesbian, gay, bisexual,
and transgender topics in foundations of education textbooks. Journal of teacher education 59:
170-88.
ODriscoll, Sally. 1996. Outlaw readings: beyond
queer theory. Signs 22: 30-51.
Sedgwick, Eve Kosofsky. 1990. Epistemology of the
closet. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


F. Ibekwe-SanJuan. The impact of geographic location on the development of a specialty field

239

The impact of geographic location


on the development of a specialty field:
A case study of Sloan Digital Sky Survey
in Astronomy*
Fidelia Ibekwe-SanJuan
Department of Information & Communication, Jean Moulin University,
4, cours Albert Thomas, 69008 Lyon, France, <ibekwe@univ-lyon3.fr>

Fidelia Ibekwe-SanJuan is currently a professor at the Information-Communication Department of


the Jean Moulin University in Lyon, France. Her research revolves around the use of linguistic, terminology methods and the application of language technologies in text mining and information retrieval.
Of particular interest to her is how new technology and tools can assist the creation of advanced
forms of knowledge organization (KO) systems (topic maps, ontologies). She is also interested in epistemological questions in KO and how research in KO intersects with other fields necessarily engaged
in designing and using various forms of KO tools such as Artificial Intelligence, LIS, Natural Language Processing (NLP) and Information Retrieval (IR).

Ibekwe-SanJuan, Fidelia. The impact of geographic location on the development of a specialty field: A case study of Sloan
Digital Sky Survey in Astronomy. Knowledge Organization, 35(4), 239-250. 19 references.
Abstract: We analyze the scientific discourse of researchers in a specialty field in Astronomy by examining the influence that
geographic location may have on the development of this field. Using as a case study the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) project, we analyzed texts from bibliographic records along three geographic axes: US-only publications, non-US publications and
international collaboration. Each geographic region reflected authors affiliated to research institutions in that region. International collaboration refers to papers published by both US-based and non-US based institutions. Through clustering of domain
terms used in titles and abstracts fields of the bibliographic records, we were able to automatically identify the topology of topics peculiar to each geographic region and identify the research topics common to the three geographic zones. The results
showed that US-only and non-US research in SDSS shared more commonalities with international collaboration than with one
another, thus indicating that the former two focused on rather distinct topics.

* This is a longer and re-worked version of a paper presented at the 10th ISKO international conference, 5-8 August, Montral, 2008.

1. Introduction
It is a reasonable assumption to think that geographic
location can play a determining role in the complex
processes involved in knowledge creation, acquisition
and organization. However, this parameter has rarely
been the focus of automated methods and systems for
knowledge representation. It becomes crucial to integrate this dimension when dealing with knowledge
that can affect the performance of services at the individual, community or national level. In this study, we

aim to investigate how geographic location influences


the constitution of a specialty research field. Using an
automatic topic mapping system aimed at assisting users in acquiring knowledge from large datasets, we
highlight geographic differences in the original data.
We take as a case study publications from the Sloan
Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) project in Astronomy. The
SDSS project aims to collect high quality data for astronomical research and is mostly funded by US institutions such as the NASA and the National Science
Foundation.

240

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


F. Ibekwe-SanJuan. The impact of geographic location on the development of a specialty field

The SDSS project is a relatively recent one. Begun


in 1991, it only started yielding publications since
1998 following the first data release from telescope
observations of the stellar objects in the universe. The
SDSS project aims to map a quarter of the sky, thus
furnishing astrophysicists with 3D images of more
than 100 million celestial objects (such as stars, quasars, and galaxies) and spectra of the million brightest
galaxies. SDSS project makes regular data releases so
that anyone can access the survey data. The publiclyavailable datasets include not only the images and
spectra, but also a database of measured parameters,
such as position, brightness, color. The SDSS project
has led to a rich emerging literature and a digital record of queries to the data repository (skyserver.sdss.org). The availability of this data has led to an
increasing number of discoveries such as highredshift quasars and significant breakthroughs in astronomical research such as the detection of cosmic
magnification caused by the gravitational effect of
dark matter throughout the universe. The SDSS project has made important new discoveries in Astronomy. According to the project website, in 2006 alone,
it has enabled discovery of new dwarf companion
galaxies to the Milky Way, confirmed Einstein's prediction of cosmic magnification, observed the largest
known structures in the universe; and further unraveled our galaxy's active past, filled with galactic mergers (see http://www.sdss.org/background/).
Given that the SDSS project is mainly funded and
operated in the US, a natural question arises about
the impact US-based research institutions may have
in shaping the structure of this field. In other words,
we seek to determine if prominent research themes
undertaken by astronomers based in the U.S. differ
significantly from their counterparts in other countries and regions such as Europe and Asia. The research questions to which we try to bring answers
are: what scientific discoveries made by the SDSS
community worldwide can be distinguished along
geographical dimensions? What is the overlap between topics in US-based publications and non-US
based ones?
2. Methodology
We address these questions from the perspective of
the automatic analysis of scientific literature of publications produced by discourse communities related
to the SDSS project. Publications from SDSS researchers worldwide constitute communication acts
from the same discourse community as they are

bound by the same research object in the sense defined by (Swales 1990) and cited in (Borg 2003): discourse communities are groups that have goals or
purposes, and use communication to achieve these
goals. We seek to characterize their terminology by
an in-depth analysis along geographical axis. Terminology is particularly relevant to the focus of the current study as it will enable us to carry out a detailed
study of focus in the scientific discourse in the three
data sets (Fellbaum 1998, Nenadic et al. 2004). The
type of results produced by our system are research
topic maps and terminology network. These constitute knowledge organization artifacts which can be
used by specialists in a given field to perform other
knowledge organization tasks. The interdisciplinary
nature of knowledge organization (KO) as a field of
research has been underlined by several authors (see
for instance, the special issue of the current journal
dedicated to the foundations of KO, edited by McIlwaine & Mitchell 2008). Several definitions of the
field have been offered, some contrasting with the
others. One component of KO on which all the authors seem to agree is that, among other things, KO
is about designing knowledge organization systems
(classification schemes, thesauri, subject headings,
lexicons, etc) and applying them to index and to retrieve documents. As pointed out by Hjrland (2002)
and cited in Lpez-Huertas (2008), amongst the
various methods for accessing domain knowledge,
terminology analysis plays a vital role because it can
reveal the emergence of new terms correlated with
new concepts in a domain. Other methods are bibliometric analysis and the joint application of methods
(bibliometric, terminological, indexing, etc.). Our
approach offers a combination of the first two
bibliometric and terminological, with a particular emphasis on the terminological level.
As more specialized digital collections become
available, there is a need to support more advanced
and customized access to information especially for
domain specialists. For this category of users, information needs, knowledge acquisition and organization are expressed in terms of more advanced computer-assisted representation of the available knowledge stored in electronic memories. One important
technique used for discovering and organizing topics
from a collection of texts is clustering (Jardine and
Van Rijsbergen 1971, Hearst 1999). Clustering offers
a means of structuring domain topics and thus furnishes the end user with some sort of map and taxonomy of major domain concepts (Schneider and
Borlund 2004). These enhanced forms of domain

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


F. Ibekwe-SanJuan. The impact of geographic location on the development of a specialty field

knowledge organization are useful when a global view


of the domain structure and dynamics is required.
Although, a number of bibliometric tools exist for
co-citation analysis and knowledge domain mapping,
they are mostly focused on author or journal cocitation data (Small 1999, White & McCain 1998).
Few bibliometric tools have considered mapping the
content of scholarly communication and when they
do, they usually consider the texts as a bag-of-words
and ignore the syntactic structure and relationships
between the terms. Thus none of the existing bibliometric tools is adapted to the goal of our analysis
here, which was to examine the differences or similarities in research topics by a linguistically-oriented
processing of the text fields in the underlying bibliographic records. To fill this gap, we developed TermWatch, a topic mapping tool based on Natural Language Processing (NLP) of texts to extract domain
terms, establish semantic relations between them and
using these relations, cluster them into domain topics. TermWatch integrates state-of-the-art techniques
for automatic text data analysis from terminology &
natural language processing (NLP), clustering and
mapping techniques. TermWatch has been used in a
number of topic mapping and terminology structuring studies (SanJuan & Ibekwe-SanJuan 2006, Ibekwe-SanJuan 2006, Ibekwe-SanJuan 2002). It is particularly adapted to topic analysis at the microscopic
level, i.e., at the level of content analysis from a corpus of texts.
Research topics are identified by applying shallow
NLP techniques to the title and abstract fields of
SDSS-related publications. First multi-word terms
are extracted. These are nominal phrases (NPs)
which can be simplex like bread basket (a headmodifier pair) or complex ones such as wicker
bread basket. The latter can be split into two simple
NPs wicker basket and bread basket. Then terminological variations are identified in order to establish a network of domain terminology (see 4.2
for some examples). This terminology network is
then clustered in other to produce clusters of
domain topics. The maps generated by TermWatch
reveal the topology of research topics in each
geographic region and allows the users to view how
the field is structured.
Next, we perform a comparative analysis of the
topic obtained based on the map generated for each
geographic region, and quantify their overlap. This
enables us to identify commonalities and differences
in research topics along geographic regions. Our
overall methodology can be represented by figure 1.

241

Figure 1. Flowchart view of the comparative analysis methodology.

3. Data collection and partitioning


Our data consists of bibliographic records of peerreviewed journal publications on SDSS between
1998-2007. These records were collected following a
search on the Web of Science (WoS) (http://scientific.
thomson.com/products/wos/). A total of 1456 bibliographic records were obtained. The corpus was
then split using the affiliation field of the WoS records (ISI), i.e. the country in which the research institution is located. Thus, the affiliation field is used
to partition the corpus into three subsets: US-only
publications, non-US publications and international
publications. US-only publications refer to those in
which the affiliation field contained only US-based
institutions. Non-US publications refer to the opposite case: the authors were affiliated to institutions in
different countries except the US. International col-

242

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


F. Ibekwe-SanJuan. The impact of geographic location on the development of a specialty field

laboration refers to collaborations between authors


from US-affiliated institutions and institutions in
the rest of the world. Among the 1456 records, 379
were published by US-based research institutions
only, 459 by non-US institutions and 618 were publications between US and non-US institutions (international collaboration). The histogram here below
gives a visual image of this distribution.

where:
<mod> = a determiner (DT) and/or an adjective
(JJ)
<N> = a noun tag
<prep1> = all other prepositions excluding of
* = Kleenes operator (zero or n occurrences of
an element)
+ = at least one occurrence of an element
This rule favours the extraction of terminological
noun phrases in a preposition structure where the
preposition is of. This preposition has been found
to play an active role in the formation of multi-word
terms. About ten such rules were sufficient to account for nominal composition in English.
4.2 Generating a graph of semantic term variants

Figure 2. Histogram of publications by US-only, non-US


and International collaboration.

We can see from these figures that the US-only publications in SDSS journal publications is almost equal
to the quantity produced by non-US (the rest of the
world). Thus, it is legitimate to seek to determine
the impact of the US in shaping the research landscape in SDSS.
4. Domain terminology acquisition and
representation
In this section, we briefly outline the processes leading from terminology extraction, terminology structuring to research topic mapping.
4.1 Multi-word Term Extraction
After the corpus has been tagged using TreeTagger
(Schmid 1999), contextual rules are used to extract
multi-word terms based on morphological and syntactic properties of terms. One such rule is the following:
<mod>* <N>+ of <mod>* <N>+
<prep1> <verb> <mod>* <N>+
then return:
1) <mod>* <N>+ of <mod>* <N>+
2) <mod>* <N>+

We studied linguistic operations which are domain


independent and can be used to build taxonomies,
thesauri or ontologies in English. Semantic relatedness here is defined as a function of morphological,
lexical and syntactic properties shared by some terms.
These operations, called terminological variations,
stem from two main linguistic operations: lexical inclusion and lexical substitution. By lexical inclusion,
we refer to the case where a shorter term is embedded
in a longer one through three specific operations: insertions (severe poisoning o severe food poisoning),
modifier or head word expansion (disaster intervention o disaster intervention call). By lexical substitution, we refer to the case where terms of identical
length share a subset of lexical items save one in the
same position (political violence threat opolitical violence campaign).
Lexical inclusions engender hypernym/hyponym
(generic/specific) relations between terms while lexical substitutions indicate a loose kind of semantic association between terms and are by the far the most
frequent relation type. Identifying these operations
between terms is a way of acquiring semantic relations between them. Lexical substitutions between
binary terms give rise to a highly connected graph of
term variants which may include some amount of
noise (spurious relations). They are filtered using
two criteria: we retain only those substitutions that
involve terms of length 3 if the words in the same
grammatical position are found in the same WordNet synset (Fellbaum 1998).
We also acquired explicit synonymy links between
multi-word terms using WordNet. To do this, we extended the single word-word relations in WordNet

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


F. Ibekwe-SanJuan. The impact of geographic location on the development of a specialty field

to multi-word terms by adding these restrictions:


two multi-word terms are considered to be in a synonymy relation if two of their words are in the same
WordNet synset, occupy the same grammatical role
in the terms (both head or modifier words) and are
found in the same position. The table below shows
some of the synonyms identified in this way. These
variations are used in the next stage of processing to
form research topics.
Variation type

Term

Variant

Spelling
variants
WordNet
synonyms
Modifier
expansions
Head
Expansions

cold-dark-matter
model

Modifier
Substitutions

AGN luminosity
function

Head
substitutions

recent star
formation activity

cold dark
matter model
spectroscopic
survey
hubble ultra deep
field
star formation
truncation
r-band
luminosity
function
recent star
formation history

spectroscopic study
hubble deep field
star formation

Table 1. Examples of semantic term variants identified in the


SDSS corpus.

4.3 Term clustering and topic mapping


After term variant identification, terms are clustered
based on the variation relations described above. The
linguistic significance of each relation can be translated in terms of one of two possible roles: COMP
and CLAS. Ideally, COMP relations are variations
that induce near-semantic equivalence or synonymy
links such as spelling variants, permutations, WordNet synonyms, modifier expansions and insertions.
COMP relations are used to form a prior category of
tight semantic clusters which serve as a first level of
aggregation. The system draws an edge (a link) between two nodes (two terms) if one is a COMP variant of the other. Thus, we first group together terms
for which there is a sequence of variations in COMP.
Since variations in COMP are supposed to link only
closely semantically related terms, resulting connected components are topically coherent, i.e., reflect
different properties of the same concept. Components are labeled by the most active term. Prior
grouping of term variants into components ensures
that semantically close terms which reflect different
aspects of the same topic are certain to end up in the
same cluster at the end of the process.

243

CLAS relations are involve a topical shift between


two terms, i.e., where the head word is different like
head expansion and head substitution. This category
of relations is used to cluster the components formed by COMP relations in a hierarchical process using the weight of CLAS relations between each
component. TermWatch chooses as cluster label, the
term with the highest number of variants. This term
can be considered a good representative of the class.
This way of regrouping terms either by shared
modifiers or by shared head is known as distributional analysis and was introduced by Harris (1968)
and later taken up by studies on automatic thesaurus
construction (Grefenstette 1997, Wacholder 1998).
We extended the definition of the types of relations
identified and added additional constraints such as
the position of added words and their number to
avoid generating spurious variants. A more formal
description of the clustering algorithm can be found
in SanJuan & Ibekwe-SanJuan (2006). Table 2 gives
an example of a cluster.
Cluster label : Quasar luminosity
Contents:
Luminosity function, AGN luminosity function, AGN
luminosity, band galaxy luminosity function, cluster
luminosity function, composite luminosity function,
derived luminosity function, emission-line luminosity
function, galaxy luminosity function, local galaxy
luminosity function, k-band luminosity function, local
x-ray luminosity function, x-ray luminosity function,
observed luminosity function, QSO luminosity
function, radio luminosity, radio luminosity function,
quasar luminosity, quasar luminosity function, r-band
luminosity function, schechter luminosity function,
cluster LF, line luminosity.
Accurate photometry, weighting scheme, strong
dependence, flatter slope, composite LF.
Table 2. Example of a cluster (research topic) generated on
the SDSS corpus.

The majority of the terms grouped into this cluster


are semantic variants of luminosity function automatically identified by the system. We observe that
this generic term has been abbreviated by authors as
LF and used in the longer terms such as cluster
LF, composite LF. The clustering algorithm was able
to capture these semantic variants and group them into the same cluster without manual intervention. Fewer terms in this cluster result from co-occurrence
associations (terms on last line), which complements
the linguistic dimension for clustering. In most bibliometric systems where items are grouped by co-

244

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


F. Ibekwe-SanJuan. The impact of geographic location on the development of a specialty field

occurrence, these semantically related terms would


have been dispersed in different clusters.
5. Results
We first analyze the topology of research topics for
each geographic region (5.1). Then, we perform a
terminological survey of topics found in each region
by a comparative analysis of cluster contents (5.2).
This terminological analysis will help us identify
overlapping and distinct research topics in the three
geographic regions.
5.1 Structure of SDSS research by geographic regions
TermWatch produced maps of research topics for
each region: US-only, non-US and International.
The system automatically identifies highly connected

topics (called central atom) and loosely connected


topics (called peripheral atoms). Also the system
performs a chronological analysis of these maps by
using the publication year of each paper. This is reflected as a color scheme on the nodes (clusters of
research topics) to indicate the period in which the
terms of that topic appeared. Owing to printing constraints (black and white images only), the color
coding system cannot be shown to its full advantage.
5.1.1. Structure of the major topics in the US-only
institutions
Three hundred and seventy-nine papers were published by US-only authors. The map below (figure 3)
shows the global view of major research topics. This
map has a cyclic shape reflecting a highly connected
set of topics. Most of the topics were found in the

Figure 3. Global image of major research topics in the US-only publications.

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


F. Ibekwe-SanJuan. The impact of geographic location on the development of a specialty field

last period of the corpus (publications made between


2005-2007) and thus were quite recent. Topic labels
found in this period are low luminosity galaxy, cluster galaxy, correlation function, halo mass function,
shallower faint-end slope, halo model parameter,
cold dark matter model, central galaxy, small scale,
void wall sample, star formation rate, incidence gas
mass density, neutral nitrogen, ly alpha trough. The
most central cluster labeled halo mass function is
focused on galaxy clustering and formation models
basing on the measurement of their halo mass and
luminosity functions.
Surrounding clusters deal with measurements and
models of galaxies drawn from the SDSS data releases
in order to predict galaxy clustering and galaxy evolution. The cluster central galaxy refers to the study of
the relation between central galaxy luminosity and
halo mass, and to the study of the relationship between galaxy luminosity, color, and environment in a
cosmological simulation of galaxy formation. Labels
found in the mid period of the corpus (2003-2005) are
large quasar sample, luminosity color environment,
power spectrum, galaxy bias, II ly alpha absorption,
early late-type galaxy. These clusters deal with the detection of quasars, the correlation function of high
redshift objects such as quasars, the study of the relation between galaxy luminosity, color and environment. Three clusters labeled QSO spectrum, C IV
absorber, high velocity refer to research topics that
appeared between 1999-2001. The cluster degree field
survey denotes a topic whose terms peaked in the period between 1996-1998. On the whole, the major research topics in SDSS in the US seem to have a highly
inter-connected structure.
5.1.2. Structure of research topics in non-US
publications
There are 459 publications in the non-US dataset.
Figure 4 shows the global image of topics found in
this data set. The topology of the map shows that
there is no one central atom as in the US-only research. Research outside the US seem to be organized around five major research topics with its one
topic acting as core and connecting the other related
topics. This topology may be explained by the fact
that non-US publications concern the rest of the
world, thus it is more expected that different research directions will be explored in parallel by different research teams in different geographic regions
outside the US. Hence a concentration around a unique center is less expected. The map of the major re-

245

search topics shows an elongated form which cannot


legibly be captured in an image view. To obtain a
global image view, we had to reduce its dimensions
but at the expense of legibility of cluster labels. For
ease of analysis, we have labeled the five centers
which connect other groups of clusters on the map.
These five major clusters are black hole, seyfert galaxy, star formation rate, supernova type ia, nearby
cluster. We explored the contents of these five clusters as well as neighboring clusters. Some of the clusters in the black hole group are black hole mass,
broad absorption line, emission line region. Seyfert
galaxy is linked to the black hole group by a cluster labeled emission line region.
The star formation rate group articulates research
around the process of star formation as evidenced by
neighboring clusters labeled stellar mass metallicity,
total stellar mass, star formation. This group of clusters is linked to the nearby cluster group by the
cluster labeled star formation, showing the proximity of the two groups of topics. Here the term cluster refers to clusters of galaxies. The supernova type ia group is linked to a star-shaped group of clusters some of which are labeled cosmic microwave
background shift parameter, dark matter particle,
dark matter particle mass, lambda CDM universe.
5.1.3. Structure of research topics in international
collaboration
These are publications co-authored simultaneously by
US and non-US institutions. 618 records were concerned. Like the non-US research, international collaboration in SDSS is not organized around a unique
center. Several groups of research topics are connected
through chains of intermediary topics. For the same
reasons already evoked, exporting a global image view
is at the expense of legibility of cluster labels. We have
circled and labeled the cluster at the center of the different groups for legibility reasons: cosmological parameter, galaxy-galaxy weak lensing, faint end slope,
sagittarius dwarf, stellar mass, fifth lensed image, complete gunn-peterson trough.
5.2. Comparative analysis of topics across the
three geographic regions
We now carry out a more detailed exploration of similarities and differences among research topics in
SDSS in the three geographical regions based on the
cluster contents. This comparison is carried out at
two levels:

246

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


F. Ibekwe-SanJuan. The impact of geographic location on the development of a specialty field

Figure 4. Map of topics from non-US publications on SDSS.

cluster label which is the representative of each research topic (a kind of descriptor)
cluster content comparison in the three geographic regions.

are some that are shared by pairs of geographic regions or by all three regions.

The idea is to determine if there are research topics


that characterize each geographic region and if there

TermWatch automatically labels its clusters with the


most active term in terms of terminological varia-

5.2.1 Similarities in research topics labels

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


F. Ibekwe-SanJuan. The impact of geographic location on the development of a specialty field

247

Figure 5. Map of topics from publications in international collaboration.

tions (the term with the highest number of variants).


This term can be considered a good representative of
the topic. TermWatch generated 163 clusters in the
non-US publications, 119 clusters for the US-only
and 240 clusters for international collaboration. Table 3 shows the overlap in cluster labels across the
three data sets, then for each pairwise set.
The overlap in cluster labels is quite low, thus
pointing to significant differences in SDSS research
across different geographic regions. It appears from
the above figures that both US-only and non-US research share more common points with international
collaboration than with one another. Table 4 gives
the list of the common labels found. The labels in
the first row are common to all three geographic zones and are thus not repeated in their respective
rows.

Non_US
Total nb_clusters

163
Total clusters

US_only
119

Inter
240

Overlap (%)

US, NonUS, Inter

552

(1 %)

US vs Non_US

282

10 (4 %)

US vs Inter

359

22 (6 %)

Non_US vs Inter

403

29 (7 %)

Table 3. Overlap in cluster labels by geographic and cultural


zones.

From table 4, it appears that the topics of star formation, emission line, surface brightness, rest frame,
large scale structure are shared by all SDSS researchers regardless of geographic location.

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


F. Ibekwe-SanJuan. The impact of geographic location on the development of a specialty field

248

Topic labels
US, Non-US, Inter (6)

star formation rate, emission line, surface brightness, black hole, rest frame,
large scale structure

US, non_US (10)

SDSS spectroscopic datum, power


spectrum, cold dark matter model,
sloan digital sky survey spectrum

Non-US, Inter (29)

composite quasar spectrum, good


agreement, radio-loud, RR lyrae, M
circle, scalar spectral index, highresolution, high redshift quasar, high
redshift, power law, cluster mass
function, accretion rate, light curve,
cosmic microwave background, dark
matter halo, BAL quasar, elliptical galaxy, column density, ZZ ceti instability strip, mass density, cold dark
matter model

US, Inter (22)

sloan digital sky survey early datum


release, low-mass, mock catalog, early
datum, radio-quiet, galaxy evolution
explorer, dark energy model, early
structure formation, mean neutral
fraction, lambda CDM model, principal component analysis, line-of-sight
velocity dispersion, cold dark matter
model, micron all sky survey 2MASS,
equivalent width

Table 4. Common topic labels shared across different geographic regions.

ne or into their contents. This consistency is remarkable considering that the terms were extracted automatically from the text fields of the titles and abstracts
and were not humanly attributed keywords. This term
extraction procedure was able to automatically identify the subset of invariant terminology in the SDSS
publications across distinct geographic regions. The
system was also able to automatically isolate the set of
shared knowledge among SDSS researchers worldwide
without resorting to a human perusal of the publications which would have been too time consuming.
The overlap observed in the three data sets, although
small, indicates a certain stability in the terminology
employed by SDSS researchers worldwide. Table 6
gives examples of some the common terms.
Terms common across the three geographic regions
US, Non-US,
Inter

black hole, black hole mass, brightest cluster


galaxy, cluster mass function, cold dark matter model, cosmic microwave background,
dark energy model, dark matter halo, dwarf
galaxy, early-type galaxy, galaxy luminosity
function, lambda CDM model, micron all sky
survey, photometric redshift, quasar luminosity function, ROSAT all-sky survey, specific
star formation rate, stellar velocity dispersion, supermassive black hole, wilkinson microwave anisotropy probe

US vs Inter

halo occupation distribution, ly alpha system,


satellite galaxy, column density, dark energy
model, dwarf galaxy, early data release, galaxy
evolution explorer, hubble space telescope,
local galaxy density, low-mass galaxy, micron
all sky survey 2MASS, optical spectrum,
principal component analysis, radio-quiet
quasar, sagittarius dwarf galaxy, specific star
formation rate, spitzer space telescope, large
scale structure, velocity dispersion

5.2.2 Similarities in topics contents


Comparison of the clusters contents obtained for each
data set gives a measure of their overlap across the
three geographic regions. This is a step further because
we do not just look at the labels but we also evaluate
the proportion of common terms within clusters. The
following table gives the details of this comparison.

US, NonUS, Inter

1467

72

(5 %)

Non-US vs Inter accretion rate, BAL quasar, candidate RR lyrae, column density, concentration index,
dark energy equation, density profile, emission line, gravitational lensing, matter power
spectrum, RR lyrae, late-type galaxy, massive
galaxy, photometric redshift accuracy, old
stellar population, young stellar population,
SDSS data release, stellar population, radioloud quasar, weak gravitational lensing, ZZ
ceti instability strip

US vs Non_US

784

86

(11 %)

US vs Non-US

US vs Inter

1025

137 (13 %)

Non_US vs Inter

1125

153 (14 %)

Total nb_terms

Non_US

US_only

International

442

342

683

Total terms

Overlap (%)

Table 5. Topic content overlap across geographic and cultural


zones.

The proportion of overlap in topics contents echoes


the ones found among topic labels. Thus, similarities
are consistent whether we look at the topic labels alo-

axis ratio, brightest cluster galaxy, central


black hole, cluster mass, SDSS, correlation
function, cluster mass function, early latetype field galaxy, spectroscopic datum, high
redshift, micron all sky survey, primordial
power spectrum, quasar luminosity, galaxy
luminosity function, large scale structure,
quasar luminosity function, rest frame, photometric redshift, sloan digital sky survey
spectrum, tidal stream, velocity dispersion

Table 6. Examples of common terms in topics across geographic regions

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


F. Ibekwe-SanJuan. The impact of geographic location on the development of a specialty field

5.2.3 Differences in topics by geographic regions


We have so far portrayed similarities both in topic
labels and contents. Here we give some examples of
differences, i.e., of topics characterizing specific geographic regions and are not found in the other two
regions. This enables us to better visualize the differences in research topics in the three data sets.
US

High velocity, high-redshift source, white


dwarf-red subdwarf system, incidence gas mass
density, large quasar sample, quasi-stellar object,
proper-motion measurement, neutral hydrogen
fraction, hubble space telescope advanced
camera, low redshift universe

non-US

dark matter halo mass, seyfert galaxy, artificial


neural network, balmer absorption, high
redshift object, three-year wilkinson microwave
anisotropy probe, independent component
analysis, gaussian initial condition, large-scale
structure formation, two-micron all-sky survey
2MASS

International

galaxy-galaxy weak lensing, galactic plane, SDSS


optical spectrum, cluster mass profile, RASS
SDSS datum, gravitational lensing, automated
selection algorithm, SUUMa-type dwarf nova,
cosmological parameter, photometric error

Table 7. Some topics labels specific to publications in each geographic region.

Although the exact labels in each data is different,


we observe that some are semantic variants of terms
in the common set. For instance, dark matter halo
which is a topic label common to non-US and International clusters (table 4), is a more generic term variant of dark matter halo mass found as a label specific to non-US topics. Although we did not find a
high overlap of exact terms in the three data sets, the
proportion of overlapping concepts might be a much
higher if we were to extend this comparison to semantically-related terms.
6. Conclusion
We have mapped out the structure of the SDSS research field based on publication records split along
three geographic regions: US, non-US and International collaboration. The specific goal of our study
was to automatically identify topics that characterized the three geographic regions and highlight their
similarities and differences. We calculated overlap of
exact terms in research topics and found this to be
consistently low whether we were looking at topic
labels or contents. The low level of overlap would
suggest that geographic location does indeed have an

249

influence in the choice of research topics in a given


field. The three geographic zones we examined have
many more unique terms characterizing their research topics than common terms. This is more evident for US vs non-US research. More expectedly,
US-only and non-US topics had slightly higher level
of overlap with topics from international collaboration. This tends to indicate that research in SDSS
within and outside the US are brought together by
international collaboration.
However, we already observed that our comparison in terminology overlap was a strict one because
we were only looking at the overlap of exact terms
and not their semantic variants. The overlap may be
much higher if we relaxed the criteria to include semantically-related terms, i.e; synonyms, hyponyms/
hypernyms, associated terms. In such a case, we may
observe a more connected structure for the three
geographic regions, thus less distinct research. This
is a matter for future investigation because it will
need a careful selection of particular variations that
will preserve the semantic class of a term.
Another significant observation in this study is
that the topology of US-only research in SDSS is cyclic while the maps obtained for the rest of the world
and for international collaboration showed several distinct subgroups, as if researchers were exploring different avenues in parallel. Let us bear in mind that the
maps obtained were the results of wholly automated
processes not requiring any human intervention.
Alongside the role of geography on the development of this specialty field, the results produced by
TermWatch offer a means of organizing domain concepts in this field according to a user defined axis. In
this instance, the system offers maps of topics and a
structuring of domain vocabulary. These maps constitute knowledge organization artifacts for researchers in the field. They offer a means of structuring domain terms into classes of related concepts
that depict research topics in the field. They can also
serve as a starting point to build a specialized taxonomy or thesaurus for a field. For young researchers
embarking on research in the field, these maps offer
a global view of current trends in the field. The results obtained here are encouraging for identifying
the impact and the uniqueness of each geographic
region in shaping the SDSS field.
References
Borg, Erik. 2003. Discourse community. ELT journal
57: 396-98.

250

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


F. Ibekwe-SanJuan. The impact of geographic location on the development of a specialty field

Fellbaum, Christiane. 1998. WordNet, An Electronic


Lexical Database. MIT Press.
Grefenstette, Gregory. 1997. SQLET:Short Query
Linguistic Expansion Techniques, Palliating OneWord Queries by Providing Intermediate Structure to Text, Proceedings of Recherche
d'Information assiste par ordinateur (RIAO),
Harris,
500-509.
Zellig S. 1968. Mathematical structures of language. New York: Wiley.
Hearst Marti. 1999. The use of categories and clusters for organizing retrieval results. In Strzalkowski, Tomek, ed. Natural language information
retrieval. Kluwer Academic Press, pp. 333-74.
Hjrland, Birger. 2002. Domain analysis in information science. eleven approachestraditional as well
as innovative. Journal of documentation 58:422-62.
Ibekwe-SanJuan, Fidelia. 2006. Clustering semantic
relations for constructing and maintaining knowledge organization tools. Journal of documentation
62: 229-50.
Ibekwe-SanJuan, Fidelia and SanJuan Eric. 2002.
From term variants to research topics. Knowledge
organization 29: 181-97.
Jardine, N and Van Rijsbergen, C.J. 1971. The use of
hierarchic clustering in information retrieval. Information storage and retrieval 7: 217-40.
Lpez-Huertas Maria. 2008. Some current research
questions in the field of knowledge organization.
Knowledge organization 35: 113-36.
Nenadic, Goran, Spasic, Irena and Ananiadou, Sophia. 2004. Mining term similarities from corpora.
Terminology 10: 55-81.
SanJuan, Eric and Ibekwe-SanJuan, Fidelia. 2006.
Textmining without document context, Information processing & management 42: 1532-52.

Schneider, Jesper W. and Borlund Pia. 2004. Introduction to bibliometrics for construction and
maintenance of thesauri. Journal of documentation
60: 524-49.
Small, Henry. 1999. Visualizing science by citation
mapping. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 50: 799-813.
Swales, John. 1990. Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge University
Press.
Salager,-Meyer Franoise. 1990. Discoursal movements in medical English abstracts and their linguistic exponents: a genre analysis study. Interface
4n2:107-24.
Wacholder, Nina. 1998. Simplex NPs sorted by head:
a method for identifying significant topics within
a document, Workshop on the Computational
Treatment of Nominals, in the Joint 17th International Conference on Computational Linguistics
and 36th Annual Meeting of the Association for
Computational Linguistics (COLING-ACL'98),
Montreal, Quebec, Canada, August, pp. 70-79.
White, Howard D. and McCain, Katherine W. 1998.
Visualizing a discipline: an author cocitation analysis of information science, 19721995. Journal of
the American Society for Information Science 49:
32755.
Zitt, Michel and Bassecoulard, Elise. 1994. Development of a method for detection and trend analysis of research fronts built by lexical or cocitation analysis. Scientometrics 30: 33351.

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Book Reviews

251

Book Reviews
Edited by Clment Arsenault
Book Review Editor

Eric R. Scerri. The Periodic Table: Its Story and Its


Significance. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.
xxii, 346 pages. ISBN-13: 978-0-19-530573-9.
The book is about the classification of chemical elements known as the periodical system. It is described
as one of the most potent icons in science [] One
sees periodic tables everywhere: in industrial labs,
workshops, academic labs, and of course, lecture
halls (p. xiii). Among all taxonomies in all domains,
there is probably none more respected and more useful than this one. As Scerri states (p. 25):
The periodic table ranks as one of the most
fruitful and unifying ideas in the whole of modern science, comparable perhaps with Darwins
theory of evolution by natural selection. Unlike
such theories as Newtonian mechanics, the periodic table has not been falsified by developments in modern physics but has evolved while
remaining essentially unchanged. After evolving
for nearly 150 years through the work of numerous individuals, the periodic table remains
at the heart of chemistry. This is mainly because
it is of immense practical benefit for making
predictions about all manner of chemical and
physical properties of the elements and possibilities for bond formation.
The periodic system provides the basic criteria for organizing knowledge about all the material stuff in the
entire universe. It is thus a model that anybody with
interests in knowledge organization (KO) should
know. Knowledge about the history, philosophy and
status of the periodic system also provides important
insight for knowledge organization in general.
Eric R. Scerri is a lecturer in chemistry as well as in
the history and philosophy of science at the University of California, Los Angeles. He is the founder and
editor-in-chief of the journal Foundations of Chemistry
(http://www.springerlink.com/content/1386-4238).
He received his Ph.D. in History and Philosophy of
Science from Kings College London. The authors

background in chemistry may indicate a growing recognition among scientists of the importance of conceptual and philosophical problems.
Given the importance of the periodical system,
one supposes that the literature about it must be
overwhelming. This is not the case, however, and the
few earlier books on the subject in English are presented in the introduction. What is of special importance for us in the field of knowledge organization is
that there is no other book in English that deals adequately with the conceptual and philosophical aspects of the periodical system.
The book is organized as follows:
Introduction
1. The Periodic SystemAn Overview
2. Quantitative Relationships among the Elements and
the Origins of the Periodic Table
3. Discoverers of the System
4. Mendeleev
5. Prediction and Accommodation: The Acceptance of
Mendeleevs Periodic System
6. The Nucleus and the Periodic Table: Radioactivity,
Atomic Number, and Isotopy
7. The Electron and Chemical Periodicity
8. Electronic Explanations of the Periodical System Developed by Chemists
9. Quantum Mechanics and the Periodic Table
10. Astrophysics, Nucleosynthesis, and More Chemistry
Notes
Index

The Periodic Table lacks a bibliography: all references


are provided in the notes. There is an index, but it is
not exhaustive. For example, van Spronsen is mentioned in the index, but the description of his book
on p. xiv is not included in the index.
This is a high-quality scholarly work that is clear
and understandable even to those without a background in chemistry and physics. While The Periodic
Table properly belongs to the philosophy of chemistry, a new field in which the author is a pioneer, it can

252

also be said that the book is currently the #1 best


seller in chemistry. (May 2006-present as compiled
by YBP Library Services, http://www.libraryjournal.
com/info/CA6408230.html)
This is a well-written and well-illustrated book. The
inclusion of Mendeleevs original drafts aid in understanding the development of his system (p. 107).
Mendeleev was able to predict the chemical and physical properties of a number of elements to an astonishing degree, although he also made false predictions
about other elements. Tables comparing the predicted
and observed properties of Gallium, Scandium and
Germanium are extremely useful (p. 13334). As the
Russian historian of chemistry Bonifatii Kedrov states,
the scientific world was astounded to note that Mendeleev, the theorist, had seen the properties of a new
element more clearly than the chemist who had discovered it (quoted by Scerri, p. 150). Throughout the
book, different views are presented and carefully
documented. The author often also presents his own
view. Personally, I would have liked a discussion of
Hegels view of the elements. Browne wrote the following in a review of Hegels Science of Logic:
Another interesting aspect of this book is its
innovative contributions to the world of chemistry and the origins of the modern periodic table of the elements. Hegel sheds light on the
earliest days of modern chemistry, reminding us
of the revolutionary processes that led up to
our understanding of chemical elements and
compounds. We are reminded that everything
stems from and starts with the compound, and
the existence of the pure elements is inferred
later by analysing phenomenon such as mixing
ratios and saturation/absorption capacities.
Hegel explains these founding pillars of chemical wisdom which many modern scientists take
for granted. It is admittedly interesting to read
about the processes that led to the discovery of
the now-ubiquitous periodic table.
(Ross James Browne is from Atlanta, Georgia,
United States, and the quote is from Amazon.com
dated March 10, 2003.)
Recently, Hegels views of chemistry have been
somewhat rehabilitated after having been exposed as
grotesque mistakes almost from the time of their
publication (Ruschig 2000), which is why it would
have been interesting to have Scerris view of Hegel
although this omission may be justified given the
perspective of the book. Scerris book is based on

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Book Reviews

deep, first-hand knowledge of a very large number of


sources.
For the remainder of this review, I would like to
concentrate on my own motivations for reviewing
this book, as well as demonstrate the general importance of The Periodic Table for information science.
Researchers in knowledge organization tend to ignore the literature about scientific and scholarly classification and sometimes even speak of it in ways
that seem to justify such ignorance. (See, for example, Hjrland & Nicolaisen 2004 and Nicolaisen &
Hjrland 2004.)
Some of my own working hypotheses for a general theory of classification are:
That any classification reflects a theory of the
domain it classifies.
That a classification should be based on pragmatic criteria related to the purpose for which
it is constructed (as opposed to objective criteria). This is related to the problem known as
natural kinds.
That knowledge is fallible and that different
views compete in any domain. Each view implies its own criteria for description and classification of the phenomena in the domain.
Competing views are basically related to different epistemological views, of which the most
important are empiricism, rationalism, historicism and pragmatism (of which pragmatism is
the most advanced theory, subsuming the other
theories).
That basic conceptions and classifications often
first develop in science and scholarship, from
which they spread to public media and library
classification systems, among other areas.
How does the present book contribute to illuminating these hypotheses?
Concerning (1). The periodic table was mainly
constructed before the discovery of quantum mechanics. How can a classification system endure in
spite of such a theoretical revolution? The answer is
that the periodical system is based on the periodical
law stating that after certain regular but varying intervals the chemical elements show an approximate
repetition in their properties (p. 16). This law is unaffected by later discoveries. In fact, it contributed
much to them. The discovery of isotopes did shake
the periodic system, but it was rescued by, among
other things, a conception of the elements as basic
substances and not as simple substances.

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Book Reviews

Concerning (2). The periodical system is probably


one of the most difficult classification systems to defend from a pragmatic point of view. However, it is
also important to test our views against the most
pre-eminent classifications if our arguments should
be convincing.
First, it is clear that although there is only one periodic law, there are many periodical tables (more
than 700 different tables have been published), which
serve different pragmatic purposes:
Thus, there are many forms of the periodical table,
some designed for different uses. Whereas a chemist
might favor a form that highlights the reactivity of
the elements, an electrical engineer might wish to focus on similarities and patterns in electrical conductivities (Scerri, p. 20).
Scerri discusses elements and their groupings as
natural kinds. The general idea is that the elements
represent the manner in which nature has been
carved at the joints: [o]n this view, the distinction
between an element and another one is not a matter
of convention (p. 280). The same is said about their
relations: [i]f periodic relationships are indeed objective properties, as I argue here, it would seem to
suggest that there is one ideal periodic classification,
regardless of whether or not this may have been discovered (p. 280).
In the past, this issue has been debated in the literature:
[S]he [Bryant 2000] nevertheless argues (p. 88
92) that even in the case of chemical elements
more than one kind of causal essentialism is
scientifically legitimate, that no one kind is
privileged.
The fact is, modern scientists classify atoms into
elements based on proton number rather than anything else because it alone is the causally privileged
factor. Thus nature itself has supplied the causal monistic essentialism. Scientists in their turn have simply discovered and followed (where simply easily) (Stamos 2004, p. 13839).
One way to solve this problem has been suggested
by John Dupr (2006):
It is often supposed that one of the goods delivered by successful science is the right way of
classifying the things in the world. [] The
standard paradigm for such a successful scientific classification is the periodic table of the
elements.

253

However, there is also much potentially wrong with


the supposition just mentioned. Most importantly,
there is a highly questionable implication of there being some uniquely best classification. Classifications
are good or bad for particular purposes, and different
purposes will motivate different classifications. It
may be that there is such an ideal classification for
chemistry, but if so it is because of the specific aims
implicit in the history of that discipline. Chemistry
aims at the structural analysis of matter and if, as appears to be the case, all matter is composed of a small
number of structural elements, a classification based
on those elements will be best suited to these purposes. It is also often the case that chemical structure
will be the best guide to the properties of kinds of
matter, but not necessarily. Two quite distinct chemicals are referred to as jade and, despite some serious
debates on the issue, Chinese jade carvers have decided that both are real jade (LaPorte 2004) (Dupr
2006, p. 30).
I see four possible ways of defending the pragmatic
view. The first is to assume that (at least certain features of) the periodic system is still open to debate.
The second is like Dupr to provide a kind of ad hoc
explanation for chemistry: The pragmatic nature of
the periodical system is related to the purpose of
chemistry, which is the structural analysis of matter.
The third is to operate with very general purposes for
the sciences, in which case an ideal classification can
be understood as the best tool with which mankind
can control nature. The fourth is to question the generality of the periodical systems organization of
similar elements. Chemists are often organized according to pragmatic categories such as agrochemistry, food chemistry, fuel chemistry, pharmacology and
toxicology. The periodical system (a cognitive classification) seems to be somewhat opposed to such
social classifications of chemists, thus indicating a
limit to the prediction of properties.
The properties of objects are not arbitrarily distributed. On the basis of some properties in an object, other properties may be predicted. The atomic
number is a strong predictor of basic chemical properties (like the DNA is a strong predictor of biological properties). Thus atomic number and DNA may
be considered criteria of natural kinds. Whether or
not they are the most relevant criteria in a given classification is another question. Not all properties are
predicted by atomic number or DNA, for example.
For some purposes, other classification criteria may
be more useful.

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Book Reviews

254

Concerning (3). Empiricist, rationalist, historicist


and pragmatist views can be traced as competing
views in relation to the periodical system. This is
most clear in relation to the understanding of an
element. Throughout the book, Scerri discusses
two ways of understanding chemical elements: as basic substances and as simple substances, which
correspond respectively to a rationalist and an empiricist view. According to Scerri, it is difficult to
fully understand the classification of the elements
without first attempting to understand what an element is and how such a concept has changed over
time (p. xv). This consideration of conceptual developments in the understanding of the periodical system (often associated with teaching chemistry) is an
indication of the importance of the historicist view
(again, the consideration of Hegels view might contribute to strengthening of this view because Hegel is
a leading figure in the criticism of empiricism and rationalism). In the chapter about the evolution of the
elements, it is stated that [t]he elements are now believed to have literally evolved from hydrogen by
various mechanisms (p. 250), which also indicates
that a historicist metaphysics and epistemology are at
play. Finally, the pragmatist view can, for example, be
seen in the weight attributed to chemical respective
physical properties when determining the similarities among the elements. Scerris view about whether
the periodical systems should be explained (and thus
reduced to) quantum mechanics alone or whether
chemistry has interests of its own can thus be viewed
as an indication of the role of a pragmatic philosophy
in the development of the periodical system.
Concerning (4). Has the periodical classification
influenced the way in which chemical substances are
classified in library classification systems, thesauri,
etc.? In fact, it can be traced in the UDC (Universal
Decimal Classification) and the MEDLINE database. It seems rather obvious that the concepts and
criteria used to organize information in library and
information science are first developed in other
fieldssuch as chemistry. This, however, is seldom
reflected in the methodology of knowledge organization. As already stated, books like Scerris seem to be
ignored in our field.
It should be mentioned that in library and information science, the periodical system was dismissed
as a classification system by Hulme (1911), originator
of the principle of literary warrant. Hulme wrote:
In Inorganic Chemistry what has philosophy to
offer? [Philosophy here means science, which

produced the periodical system]. Merely a classification by the names of the elements for
which practically no literature in book form exists. No monograph, for instance, has yet been
published on the Chemistry of Iron or Gold.

Hence we must turn to our second alternative which


bases definition upon a purely literary warrant. According to this principle definition is merely the result of an accurate survey and measurement of
classes in literature. A class heading is warranted
only when a literature in book form has been shown
to exist, and the test of the validity of a heading is
the degree of accuracy with which it describes the
area of subject matter common to the class. Definition [of classes or subject headings], therefore, may
be described as the plotting of areas pre-existing in
literature. To this literary warrant a quantitative
value can be assigned so soon as the bibliography of
a subject has been definitely compiled. The real classifier of literature is the book-wright, the so-called
book classifier is merely the recorder (Hulme 1911,
4647)
Hulmes principle of literary warrant seems not to
conflict with the way in which the periodical classification has been used in systems like UDC and
MEDLINE: if there is no warrant for a given element, the broader category may be applied. However, this issue points to some vagueness in the concept of literary warrant.
Conclusion
Scerris book demonstrates how one of the most important classification systems has evolved and what
kinds of conceptualizations and classification criteria
are at work in it. It is probably the best book about the
best classification system ever constructed. It should
belong to any library supporting teaching and research in knowledge organization.
References
Bryant, Rebecca. 2001. Discovery and decision: exploring the metaphysics and epistemology of scientific
classification. Madison, NJ: Fairleigh Dickinson
University Press.
Dupr, John. 2006. Scientific classification. Theory,
culture & society 23(2/3): 3032.
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich. 1989. Science of
logic. New York: Prometheus Books. (Translated

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Book Reviews

from the German: Wissenschaft der Logik, first


published in 1812).
Hjrland, Birger and Nicolaisen, Jeppe. 2004. Scientific and scholarly classifications are not nave: a
comment to Beghtol (2003). Knowledge organization 31: 5561.
Hulme, E. Wyndam. 1911. Principles of book classification. Library Association record 13: 35458, Oct.
1911; 38994, Nov. 1911 & 44449, Dec. 1911.
Nicolaisen, Jeppe and Hjrland, Birger. 2004. A rejoinder to Beghtol (2004). Knowledge organization
31: 199201.
Ruschig, Ulrich. 2000. Hegels philosophy of the
chemical process: a rehabilitation. Book review of
Burbidge (1996). Hyle-international journal for
philosophy of chemistry 6: 17577.
Stamos, David N. 2004. Book Review of: Discovery
and decision: exploring the metaphysics and epistemology of scientific classification. Philosophical psychology 17: 13539.

Professor Birger Hjrland, Royal School of Library


and Information Science, DK-2300 Copenhagen S,
bh@db.dk

Marc Ereshefsky. The Poverty of the Linnaean Hierarchy: A Philosophical Study of Biological Taxonomy.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. x,
316 p. ISBN-13: 978-0-521-03883-6.
This book was published in 2000 simultaneously in
hardback and as an electronic resource, and, in 2007,
as a paperback. The author is a professor of philosophy at the University of Calgary, Canada. He has
an impressive list of contributions, mostly addressing
issues in biological taxonomy such as units of evolution, natural kinds and the species concept.
The book is a scholarly criticism of the famous
classification system developed by the Swedish botanist Carl Linnaeus (17071778). This system consists
of both a set of rules for the naming of living organisms (biological nomenclature) and principles of
classification. Linns system has been used and
adapted by biologists over a period of almost 250
years. Under the current system of codes, it is now
applied to more than two million species of organisms. Inherent in the Linnaean system is the indication of hierarchic relationships. The Linnaean system

255

has been justified primarily on the basis of stability.


Although it has been criticized and alternatives have
been suggested, it still has its advocates (e.g., Schuh,
2003). One of the alternatives being developed is The
International Code of Phylogenetic Nomenclature,
known as the PhyloCode for short, a system that
radically alters the current nomenclatural rules. The
new proposals have provoked hot debate on nomenclatural issues in biology.
Ereshefskys book is organized into three parts
and eight chapters:
Preface
Introduction
Part I: The historical turn
1. The philosophy of classification
2. A primer of biological taxonomy
3. History and classification
Part II: The multiplicity of nature
4. Species pluralism
5. How to be a discerning pluralist
Part III: Hierarchies and nomenclature
6. The evolution of the Linnaean hierarchy
7. Post-Linnaean taxonomy
8. The future of biological nomenclature
Notes
References
Index

A good starting point is Chapter Six, in which it is


stated that Linns system was based on the assumption that plants have two vital functions: nutrition
which preserves the individual, and reproduction
which preserves the kind. To know what kind a plant
is one needs to study its function in reproduction, in
particular, those parts that play a role in its reproduction (p. 202). This was Linns main reason to focus
on reproductive organs in classifying plants. Another
factor in his decision was that fructification characters are easy to work with because they are the
most complex organ-system of plants and provide
a large number of characters and can be described
with precision (p. 202). Linnaeus used thirty-one
sexual characteristics and four variables, which he
calculated would suffice for 3,884 generic structures
or more than will ever exist.
He [Linn] often lacked representatives of all species of a genus and thus was unable to determine the

256

unique fructification system of a genus. Given the


method of logical division, a classification system
cannot be considered real or natural unless the true
fructification systems of genera are determined.
Consequently, Linnaeus saw his classification as artificial and provisional guides for yet-to-be determined
true classifications (p. 204).
Ereshefsky finds that three (false) theoretical assumptions serve as the foundation of the Linnaean
system: creationism, essentialism and the belief that
genera are the most important taxa in his hierarchy
(p. 205). Much of the book is an examination of how
these assumptions shaped the system and how alternatives of these assumptions should inform an alternative system. Ereshefsky finds that from the perspective of modern biology the only element of
Linnaeuss original system that remains firmly intact
is his binominal rule for naming species. But that rule, as we shall see, may need to be altered as well
(p. 221).
Essentialism is a target for much criticism in
scientific classification today. This review will not go
too deeply into the controversies here, but provide
some summary. Mayr (1997, 128) writes:
The typological or essentialistic species concept
[] postulated four species characteristics: (1)
species consist of similar individuals sharing in
the same essence; (2) each species is separated from all others by a sharp discontinuity;
(3) each species is constant through space and
time; and (4) the possible variation within any
one species is severely limited.
Mayr adds: Philosophers referred to such essentialistically conceived species as natural kinds.
While such an understanding of essentialism is
clearly refuted by Darwinism, it is less certain that
the following definition of essentialism (pp. 23 &
95) is also obsolete:
All and only the members of a kind share a set
of traits; those traits make entities the kinds of
things they are; thus, those traits are crucial in
explaining the other properties typically associated with the members of a kind.
Cooper (2005, 47) summarized the central problem
as follows:
Several different criteria may be employed by
biologists seeking to determine species: mor-

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Book Reviews

phological futures, evolutionary lineages, the


criteria of reproductive isolation, or genetic features. On examination none of these appears
suitable candidates for being the essential properties of biological species.
Ereshefsky provides a good argument as to why essentialism is in conflict with a theory of (slow) gradual evolution and thus must be rejected in biology
(p. 9596). On the other hand, he seems to accept
essentialism in chemistry (p. 17):
Mendelevs periodic table is often cited as a
model for essentialism. All and only the members of a particular element share a common
real essence their unique and common
atomic structure. And knowledge of that structure enables us to predict and explain the behavior of instances of that element.
It is one matter to define essentialism and to judge
whether or not it constitutes a problematic basis of
classification. (Most philosophers today reject essentialism.) Quite another issue is whether Linns system is based on essentialistic thinking. MllerWilhle (2007, 541) finds that the criticism that Linn
was an essentialist is a misunderstanding:
Historians and philosophers of science have interpreted the taxonomic theory of Carl Linnaeus (17071778) as an essentialist, Aristotelian, or even scholastic one. This interpretation is flatly contradicted by what Linnaeus
himself had to say about taxonomy in Systema
naturae (1735), Fundamenta botanica (1736)
and Genera plantarum (1737) (1) Linnaeuss
species concept took account of reproductive
relations among organisms and was therefore
not metaphysical, but biological; (2) Linnaeus
did not favour classification by logical division,
but criticized it for necessarily failing to represent what he called natural genera; (3) Linnaeuss definitions of natural genera and species were not essentialist, but descriptive and
polytypic; (4) Linnaeuss method in establishing natural definitions was not deductive, but
consisted in an inductive, bottom-up procedure
of comparing concrete specimens.
Thus, a major line of argument in Ereshefskys book
seems to be based on a controversial interpretation
of Linns principles.

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Book Reviews

Chapter Seven considers post-Linnaean taxonomy


and contains a number of recommendations for
changes, such as R11: Where possible, taxon names
should be given phylogenetic definitions (p. 266).
All the suggestions are made in order to provide a
classification of organisms based on modern biological research. In this review, we shall not further consider the different alternatives in biological taxonomy today, but rather concentrate on the complex of
problems involved in scientific classification, which
is the main theme of the first two parts of the book.
Part II (Chapters Four and Five) concerns pluralism. Ereshefsky argues for the view of metaphysical
pluralism, i.e. that the forces of evolution produced
at least three different types of base lineages (interbreeding, ecological and phylogenetic) that crossclassify the organic world, which is why a plurality of
equally legitimate classifications exists. Science
should carve nature at its joints, but perhaps the
world is carved in multiple ways, each corresponding
to a particular taxonomic approach. Biologists face
different commitments to various rules, each of
which motivates different avenues of research and
different classifications.
Part I is termed The Historical Turn. It refers to
what might be understood as a paradigm shift in
classification theory. I believe, however, that it would
have been better to have given Part I the title The
Philosophy of Classification, which reflects the different views presented and not just the new paradigm.
In Hjrland (2003, 107) and elsewhere, this reviewer has argued that four basic philosophies of classification correspond to four basic epistemological
schools: empiricism, rationalism, historicism and
pragmatism.
Ereshefsky seems not to defend a particular epistemological position in relation to biological taxonomy. On the other hand, he seems to be in accordance with the reviewers rejection of empiricism and
rationalism as defined above. Overall, the book
seems to confirm the reviewers epistemological understanding in this domain, underscoring the different paradigms at play in modern biological taxonomy: Contemporary biology contains no fewer
than four general schools of taxonomy: evolutionary
taxonomy, pheneticism, process cladism, and pattern
cladism (p. 7). In many ways Ereshefsky, seems to
confirm the reviewers view, although this conclusion
must be drawn by inference.
Ereshefskys presentation of logical division
(termed essentialism) as a method in knowledge or-

257

ganization seems to correspond to rationalism and


his presentation of cluster analysis and of pheneticism, which divides entities into groups whose members share a cluster of similar traits, corresponds to
empiricism.
In Ereshefskys use of the term, a system following the historical approach classifies entities according to their causal relations rather than their intrinsic qualitative features. This corresponds only
partly to historicism in epistemology. What Ereshefsky terms the historical approach Gnoli (2006)
terms phylogenetic classification (which, according
to Gnoli, includes the classification of musical instruments). Perhaps genetic classification or genealogical classification would be a better term (understood broadly as the identification of the causes
producing a phenomenon, as Michel Foucault uses
it). My point here is that Ereshefskys use of the
term historical only refers to the object of study,
not to the researchers way of understanding the object (as reflected in, for example, the hermeneutic
circle and in Flecks (1935) study of syphilis). If
Ereshefsky had argued that it is necessary for the
biological taxonomist to consider the different conceptions and theories (as, for example, those presented in his own book), historicism would be at
work. For Ereshefskys book to correspond to epistemological historicism properly speaking, this additional reflection on theory would be necessary.
Finally, let us consider pragmatism in relation to
this book. It is worth mentioning that pragmatism
evolved out of the evolutionary biological view,
which is why this view should not be strange or unfamiliar to biologists. Ereshefsky carefully considers
the purpose of classification and also, at several
points, the practical issues related to classification.
But at a deeper level, the pragmatic view is connected to the argument that a certain way to classify
organisms is in accordance with certain goals of biological research. Perhaps Ereshefskys defence of
metaphysical pluralism can be seen as an attempt to
answer to the overall interests of biology. If only
one of the three different types of base lineages
mentioned (interbreeding, ecological and phylogenetic) were considered, this might have negative implications for biological science. For example, interbreeding works only for the minority of organisms
which have sexual reproduction. If this definition of
species was the only one used, the systematics of all
non-sexual organisms would suffer. If this argument
is acceptable, Ereshefsky can be interpreted as being
a pragmatist.

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Book Reviews

258

In the rest of this review, I shall consider some


implications this book may have for knowledge organization (KO) and library and information science.
Consider, for example, the principle of logical division, which is a basic method in the facet analytic
tradition. As Vickery writes (1960, 12): Facet analysis is therefore partly analogous to the traditional
rules of logical division, on which classification has
always been based. Ereshefsky criticizes this method throughout the book. He writes, for example:
If taxa lack essences, then the method of logical division has no role in classificationthere is no essences on which it can operate. Accordingly, that method has been dropped from biological taxonomy
(Ereshefsky, p. 211). Furthermore, he notes (p. 296):
Mayr (1982, 174, 179, 191) and Atran (1990,
108), for instance, offer a historical case against
the method of logical division. According to
that method, entities are sorted into a hierarchy
of classes such that each class is subdivided into
two [sic!] lower classes by a set of differentiating properties [= a criterion of division?]. As
Mayr and Atran observe, the method of logical
division breaks up natural groups (see Section
1.1). Thus that method fails to provide empirically accurate classifications that serve as a basis
for making inferences about the organic world.

Scientific classification and logical division has


[sic] worked fairly well in the classification of
natural kinds, such as Linnaeus classification of
living things. The reason is that the characteristics chosen, such as the shape of a fruit, are easy
to perceive and describe. Furthermore, all biologists and botanists would agree on the interpretation of the characteristics (Lakoff,
1987). Such taxonomies do not intend to analyze the meaning of the terms, but are merely
classifications of kinds of things. The chosen
characteristics by which the genus is divided
into genera are properties of the things classified and the characteristics are subject to inspection. However, the users of such taxonomies know that the use of the classification requires some sort of interpretation. That is why
a zoologist would not dispute a statement like
this cat has three legs, since he knows that
there can be handicapped cats. He would still
classify cats as four legged mammals and he
would still say that the property of being fourlegged belongs to cats, but he would not say
that cats are four-legged necessarily or analytically (Eco, 1984). In other words, nothing specific is said about individual cats in such a classification.
And further (Mai 2004, 42):

(That a class be subdivided into two lower classes is


not a requirement. I believe that Ereshefsky has
made a mistake at this point. One logical principle of
division, e.g. division by age, may result in a number
of classes, not just two. In the index of the book, the
method of dichotomous division is considered equivalent to the method of logical division, which seems
to be inconsistent with what is written about Linns
use of this method on p. 201202.)
Insofar as Ereshefskys criticism of logical division
is valid, the whole school of facet-analysis in library
and information science seems to suffer, for logical
division is the basis of facet-analysis. At least, it
seems important for information science to reconsider its approach in light of the recent developments
in scientific classification.
Another implication of Ereshefskys book is a
problematization of Mais (2004) understanding that
the classification of documents is distinct from the
classification of biological organisms (and from physical objects). Mai (2004, 41) maintains:

It is my contention that scientific classification


of natural objects, and the bibliographic classification of the content of a document, are distinct for two main reasons. The first has to do
with when and how the items are classified, and
the second has to do with the nature of the
classified items.
Ereshefsky claims in many ways the opposite of what
Mai expresses above. He does not find that Scientific classification and logical division has [sic]
worked fairly well in the classification of natural
kinds or that criteria for classify organise are easy
to perceive and describe. Mais claim that scientific
classification of natural objects, and the bibliographic
classification of the content of a document, are distinct seems also problematic because each school of
biological taxonomy has different criteria, which may
be applied to both organisms and their descriptions
in documents. It should be mentioned, however, that
Mai himself also questions some of the cited assumptions based on Broadfield (1946).

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Book Reviews

A third and final consideration for knowledge organization is the distinction made between classification and categorization. Jacob (2004, 15) contrasted
classification with categorization and defined classification in a restricted way that does not account
for Ereshefskys three general philosophical schools
[of classification] []: essentialism, cluster analysis,
and historical classification. Although Jacob claims
that Ereshefsky misuses the term classification,
thus confusing classification and categorization,
we might ask for textual evidence showing that
Ereshefskys terminology is faulty. My own feeling is
that it is not.
Conclusion
Ereshefsky (2000) has been cited once in this journal. The citation concludes (Gnoli 2006, 144):
To summarize what we have seen in various domains, classification can be based on two major principles: similarity, and common origin.
Gnoli here seems to have overlooked the fact that
Ereshefsky (2000) discusses three major principles:
logical division based on essential characteristics,
cluster analysis based on similarity measurement and
historical classification based on common ancestors.
(He has also overlooked that Hjrland (1998 and
2003) discusses four major principles of classification
based on, respectively, empiricism, rationalism, historicism and pragmatism.)
I believe that Ereshefskys book has much to offer
to KO and that we really need to consider the literature of scientific classifications.
References
Broadfield, A. 1946. The philosophy of classification.
London: Grafton.
Cooper, Rachel. 2005. Classifying madness: A philosophical examination of the diagnostic and statistical
manual of mental disorders. Berlin: Springer.
Ereshefsky, Marc. 2000. The poverty of the Linnaean
hierarchy: a philosophical study of biological taxonomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fleck, Ludwik. 1979. Genesis and development of a scientific fact. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
(German original 1935).
Gnoli, Claudio. 2006. Phylogenetic classification.
Knowledge organization 33: 13852.
Hjrland, Birger. 1998. The classification of psychology: a case study in the classification of a knowledge field. Knowledge organization 24: 162201.

259

Hjrland, Birger. 2003. Fundamentals of knowledge


organization. Knowledge organization 30: 87111.
Jacob, Elin K. 2004. Classification and categorization:
a difference that makes a difference. Library trends
52(3): 515540.
Mai, Jens-Erik. 2004. Classification in context: relativity, reality, and representation. Knowledge organization 31: 3948.
Mayr, Ernst. 1997. This is biology. the science of the living world. Cambridge, Mass.; London: Belknap
Press of Harvard University Press.
Mller-Wille, Staffan. 2007. Collection and collation:
theory and practice of Linnaean botany. Studies in
history and philosophy of science part c: studies in history and philosophy of biological and biomedical
sciences 38: 541-62.
Schuh, Randall T. 2003. The Linnaean system and its
250-year persistence. Botanical review 69: 5978.
Vickery, B. C. 1960. Faceted classification: a guide to the
construction and use of special schemes. London:
ASLIB.

Professor Birger Hjrland, Royal School of Library


and Information Science, DK-2300 Copenhagen S,
bh@db.dk

Rachel Cooper. Classifying Madness: A Philosophical


Examination of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual
of Mental Disorders. Berlin: Springer, 2005. vii, 172 p.
(Philosophy and Medicine, vol. 86). ISBN: 978-14020-3344-5 (hbk.). (Also available as electronic
Kindle book from Amazon.com).
The author, Rachel Cooper, Senior Lecturer at Lancaster University, holds a Ph.D. in History and Philosophy of Science from Cambridge University. The
title of her thesis is also Classifying Madness.
Classifying Madness: A Philosophical Examination
of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
Disorders concerns a particular classification system
for mental disorders, the DSM, published by the
American Psychiatric Association. The DSM is the
classification system used most often in diagnosing
mental disorders in the United States. Although the
International Classification of Diseases (ICD) is a
commonly-used alternative outside the U.S., the
DSM still holds immense weight internationally. Today, the DSM has almost the status as a bible within

260

the psychiatric community and has been used to


challenge the pervasive criticism that psychiatric diagnoses are unreliable and invalid. The first edition
(DSM-I) was published in 1952. The DSM-II was
published in 1968, the DSM-III in 1980 and the
DSM-III-R as a revision in 1986. The current fourth
edition, the DSM-IV was first published in 1994. A
text revision known as DSM-IV-TR appeared in
2000. Work on a new fifth edition is underway.
Rachel Cooper structures the bulk of her argument in five parts: (1) What is Mental Disorder?, (2)
Are Mental Disorders Natural Kinds?, (3) The Problem of Theory-ladenness, (4) The D.S.M. and Feedback in Applied Science, and (5) Conclusions. Classifying Madness also contains an appendix, bibliographic references and an index.
1 What is Mental Disorder?
Just as any system of knowledge organization is always, implicitly or explicitly, consciously or unconsciously, based on an understanding (or theory) of
the domain it organizes, the DSM is based on an understanding of what mental disorders are. An important part of constructing or evaluating classifications
is to examine such understanding.
This book shows how the assumptions behind a
classification system can be examined and, in being
made explicit, used fruitfully towards improvements
in the classification of the domain. The chapter
claims that the DSM is based on an incorrect understanding of disease, however (p. 41):
The account of disease used by the D.S.M.
committee in practice, I suggest, was not far
wrong. This being said, there may be reason to
doubt the extent to which decisions to include
particular conditions in the D.S.M. were influenced by accounts of disease.
The chapter provides fine arguments for an explicit
and consequent account of disease and concludes (p.
43): I have argued that whether a condition is a disease is in part a value-judgement. As doctors are not
experts in making value-judgements, it follows from
my account that it not appropriate for them alone to
have a say in deciding which conditions are diseases.
2 Are Mental Disorders Natural Kinds?
The problem of natural kinds is important for classification theory because it contains the idea that

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Book Reviews

classifications are not made for a purpose, but reflect


an underlying natural order. Cooper writes (p. 47):
In recent years traditional essentialist accounts of
natural kinds have come in for fierce criticism. A major difficulty is that for biological species, which are
traditionally considered amongst the best examples
of natural kinds, no plausible candidates for the essences can be found. Several different criteria may be
employed by biologists seeking to determine species:
morphological features, evolutionary lineages, the
criteria of reproductive isolation, or genetic features.
On examination none of these appears suitable candidates for being the essential properties of biological species.
One of the theories discussed is John Duprs
theory of promiscuous realism, according to which
classifications may reflect a real structure of nature
(hence their realism), but that many different classification systems can be extracted from a given pattern without any one of them being privileged over
the others (hence their promiscuity). Cooper has
developed her own theory about natural kinds (p.
51): I suggest that the right account of natural kinds
claims that members of a natural kind possess similar
important properties. These important properties are
important because they determine many of the other
properties possessed by members of the kind. For
this reason I will call them determining properties.
On page 72 she provides a specific example: Huntingtons Chorea is caused by a single dominant gene
on chromosome four. Symptoms generally appear in
middle-age and include jerky involuntary movements, behavioural changes, and progressive dementia. Plausibly Huntingtons Chorea is a natural kind
of mental disorder; in all cases an identical determining property, the defective gene, produces characteristic symptoms. The author warns, however (p. 74):
It should be remembered that classification systems
should not only provide information about the entities they categorise, but also need virtues that will
enable them to be used in practice. In some cases it
may be best to reflect the natural structure of a domain, in other cases it will be better to employ categories that make sharp divisions where naturally
there are none. She concludes, that even if some
mental disorders are natural kinds (p. 76):
There may be difficulties constructing a classification that reflects the natural similarities between types of mental disorders. In the next
two chapters two potential sources of difficulty
will be considered. These arise from the possi-

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Book Reviews

bility that observation in psychiatry is theoryladen, and from the fact that the D.S.M. is
shaped by pressures emerging from the various
ways in which it is used in practice.
3 The Problem of Theory-ladenness
This important chapter concerns the theory-ladenness
of observations, as well as that of classifications. For
people without knowledge of this philosophical problem, it may be hard to accept that our observations are
not direct reflections of a true reality, but are influenced by the theories we have. This chapter does a
very fine job in presenting the problem in a clear way
and could be assigned as required reading in classes on
classification and knowledge organization.
Although Cooper discusses at length the kind of
theory relevant in discussing the theory-ladenness of
the DSM system, I feel that she does not present a
clear picture of which different metaphysical theories
may be the most relevant ones. My on view is informed by, for example, Danziger (2000).I suspect
that psychiatrists tend to focus more on symptoms,
methods and criteria related to metaphysical theories
such as atomism, universalism and decomposability,
while disregarding, for example, the roles of language
and cultural objects and thus more holistic and relativistic metaphysical assumptions. The positivist researchers claim to be anti-metaphysical, but in reality
use implicit metaphysical theories that limit their
perspectives. Relevant theoretical issues may be uncovered by considering underlying positivist assumptions in psychiatric research.
DSM-I and DSM-II were strongly influenced by
the psychodynamic approach to mental disorders,
but with DSM-III, the psychodynamic view was
abandoned and the biomedical model became the
primary approach, introducing a clear distinction between normal and abnormal. The DSM claimed to be
atheoretical since it had no preferred etiology for
mental disorders. When DSM-III was first published
in 1980, it embodied a radical new method for identifying psychiatric illness. The most central problem
for a theory of classification is how it is related to
theories in its domain, for a system cannot be neutral
with respect to those theories. The next section goes
into this question in more detail.

261

Chapter 3, Section 4:
The Theory-ladenness of Numerical Techniques
of Classification
At the end of Chapter 3, Cooper discusses the technique of cluster analysis and relates it to numerical
techniques in general. This important section deserves a chapter of its own. The question here taken
up could also be asked of research in information
science and knowledge organization: are techniques
such as bibliometrics and automatic indexing providing neutral, objective, atheoretical classifications?
Cooper says about this is valid. First, she finds
that, although DSM is not based on cluster analysis
to any extent worth mentioning, it succumbs to presuppositions implicit in the latter (p. 96):
The numerical taxonomy movement in biology
made much of the supposed objectivity, empiricism, and naturalness of the classes produced. Similarly, the D.S.M.-III committee
called for a rejection of theory-based classification on the grounds of the paucity of theoretical knowledge. Like the Numerical Taxonomists, they also aimed at a classification system
constructed on empirical, atheoretical grounds.
Coopers most important conclusion is that one
cannot select empirical variables for numerical techniques for classification without a basis in domainspecific theory. The arguments are mostly based on
thought-experiments, however, and not upon empirical studies. I believe, nonetheless, that in this her
reasoning is sound. Firstly, such techniques have
been used very much (e.g. in intelligence research)
and no clear pattern seems to have been established.
Secondly, such studies appear to be based on unrealistic assumptions that disregard cultural factors.
4 The D.S.M. and Feedback in Applied Science
This chapter should prove the most stimulating for
information scientists. It not only relates how the
DSM is used in different kinds of practice and explains why the growth in use has been tremendous,
but also investigates the impact of its application on
the system. Its wider influence has also meant that
psychiatrists have succeeded in controlling the ways
in which other professionals such as psychologists
and social workers see and do things. The pharmacological industry, as well as the insurance industry,
has had much influence. Cooper shows how social

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Book Reviews

262

interests and pragmatic factors influence a classification that claims to be purely scientific.
Relevance for LIS
When a system becomes as powerful as the DSM has,
other systems of knowledge organization come under pressure to adapt to them. For example, the Clinicians Thesaurus (Zuckerman, 2000), which is more
like a handbook than a traditional thesaurus, was described as follows in the publishers advertising:
Clinicians Thesaurus helps mental health practitioners find the right words to describe their
clients quickly and accurately. The new edition
of this popular guidebook has been updated
and expanded and is fully compatible with
DSM-IV. It offers an exhaustive checklist of
thousands of words and phrases in an easily accessible formatin effect, the whole language
of the mental health professions. Enabling
practitioners to quickly select the appropriate
terms to describe almost every clinical situation, it makes constructing meaningful reports
easier than ever before.
Similarly, the Thesaurus of Psychological Index Terms,
5th edition, claimed to reflect the DSM (Walker and
Mulholland 1992, 48):
With the publication of the third revised edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of
Mental Disorders (DSM-III-R), all index terms
in the psychological disorders area were reviewed. A major reorganization and reconstruction of index terminology for mood disorders,
schizophrenias, psychoses, and anxiety disorders was completed. Most disorder terms now
reflect changes in diagnostic categories represented by the DSM-III-R.

Scientific classifications are clearly relevant for


bibliographic classifications, thesauri and other
kinds of knowledge organizing systems. This important connection is, however, often forgotten in LIScontexts. One reason might be that the literature
about scientific classification is too technical and difficult.
Knowledge-organizing systems are made to serve
goals, interests and values. They can only do so
properly with consideration of the kinds of problems
revealed by Classifying Madness. This applies to the
development of ontologies, which have become a
strong trend: Coopers book would be of equal interest to information and computer scientists developing ontologies of mental diseases. If information
scientists are unfamiliar with these issues, they cannot influence their own systems in a conscious way.
The DSM has formerly been considered within our
field (e.g. Spasser, 1998).
Conclusion
The literature on the DSM is huge. However, Classifying Madness remains particularly clear and articulate in its analysis of the DSMs conceptual underpinnings. Furthermore, it is important in illuminating some core issues in classification theory as they
present themselves in the case of mental disorders.
Often books about classification in specific disciplines are very technical and difficult, but Classifying
Madness is comprehensible, even to those without
specialized knowledge in psychiatry or philosophy
although some philosophical background would
probably provide the patience necessary to read
through the complicated details of classification
problems. This book is not too specialized for information science students, either: knowledge gained
by Classifying Madness can be transferred and used to
question other classification systems.
References

[This information was not given in the Thesaurus,


American Psychological Association, 1988. In PsycINFO News, Vol. 20(3), p. 3, it is mentioned that
the 9th ed. of the thesaurus has harmonized mental
disorders terms with current DSM-IV terminology.
Again, this information is not provided in the thesaurus itself or in any scholarly information source,
but only in the more commercial-oriented documents. I believe that the Thesaurus of Psychological
Index Terms runs into difficulties by trying to adjust
their terminology to the DSM.]

Danziger, Kurt. 2000. Making social psychology experimental: A conceptual history, 19201970.
Journal of the history of the behavioral sciences 36:
32947.
PsycINFO News, 20(3), 20002001. http://www.
apa.org/psycinfo/training/pin/00-01falwin.pdf.
Spasser, Mark A. 1998. Psychiatrists make diagnoses,
but not in circumstances of their own choosing:
agency and structure in the DSM. Library trends
47(2): 31337.

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Book Reviews

Stamos, David N. 2004. Book Review of: Discovery


and Decision: Exploring the Metaphysics and Epistemology of Scientific Classification. Philosophical
psychology 17: 13539.
Walker, Alvin, Jr. and Mulholland, Sarah N. 1992.
The thesaurus of psychological index termsA historical review. Behavioral & social sciences librarian
11(2): 3957.

263

Zuckerman, Edward L. 2000. Clinicians thesaurus,


5th ed. New York: Guilford Publications.

Professor Birger Hjrland, Royal School of Library


and Information Science, DK-2300 Copenhagen S,
bh@db.dk

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


ISKO News

264

ISKO News
Edited by Hanne Albrechtsen
Communications Editor

Online Information Conference 2008

ISKO UK Call for Papers

2-4 December
Grand Hall, Olympia, London, UK

Content Architecture:
Exploiting and Managing Diverse Resources
London, 22-23 June 2009
Biennial Conference of the British Chapter
of the International Society for Knowledge
Organization (ISKO UK)

Clay Shirky, author of Here Comes Everybody, and


respected authority on the social and economic effects of Internet technologies will open this years
conference with a keynote address that will examine
Every piece of information is a latent community.
In his keynote Clay will explore how one of the
absolutes of information is that people dont just like
to have it, they like to share it, discuss it and argue
about it. In the digital world, we now have media
that can both transmit information and coordinate
people at the same time; one potent side-effect is
that published information can call a topic-specific
community into being, by linking together the people who gather around it.
Adrian Dale, Online Information Conference
Chairman says, We are delighted to have secured
Clay Shirky as our keynote speaker this year. One of
the most widely quoted internet commentators, Clay
shakes the business world every time he speaks and
writes challenging accepted thinking on the social
and economic impact of the internet and new media.
The sell out Online Information 2007 conference
attracted over 900 delegates from 45 countries.
In 2008 the conference programme gets to the
heart of industry issues with three strong tracks:
Web 2.0 Breakthroughs, Consolidation and Payback
The Challenges of Information and Organisation
and Retrieval in a Semantic World
Information Professionals Surviving and Thriving in the New Age
For more information, or to view the conference
programme in full, please visit:
www.online-information.co.uk/conference

ISKO UK 2009 conference Content Architecture:


Exploiting and Managing Diverse Resources will
provide a rare opportunity for researchers, practitioners and innovators from all sectors to share ideas on
the opportunities and challenges implicit in the digitization and networking of diverse information resources. The Conference will address issues in the
organization and integration of text, images, data and
voice -multimedia and multilingual. Over the past
year ISKO UK (http://www.iskouk.org/) has attracted large and lively audiences of content and information architects, website developers, knowledge
engineers, information managers and many others to
its afternoon meeting series (http://www.iskouk.org/
events.htm). The conference aims to extend this
wide audience to ensure that all aspects of knowledge
organization are represented.
Themes of the 2009 Conference include:
semantic interoperability across networked resources
metadata models and architecture
retrieval of still and/or moving images
audio retrieval
user enhancement (via tagging, feedback, etc.) of
content
multilingual access to mixed resources
integrated combinations of media and/or content
types
Papers on the conference themes are invited from the
academic and practitioner communities and may pre-

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No. 4


ISKO News

sent research, case studies or even success stories!


Contributions may be full length (5-10,000 words)
or brief (2-4,000 words). Proposals for posters may
be submitted too. Full presentations will be allowed
40 minutes, including at least 5 minutes for questions, while brief presentations should occupy a total
of 20 minutes. As well as being available online to
coincide with the Conference, the Proceedings will
be published afterwards in a leading peer-reviewed
journal.
Submission: To read more about the conference
and to submit your abstract, go to the conference
website http://www.iskouk.org/conf2009/index.htm.
Important Dates
Submission of Abstracts: 1 December 2008
Notification of acceptance: 1 February 2009
Submission of full papers: 1 May 2009
Contact: conference2009@iskouk.org
About the Organizer: ISKO UK is a not-for-profit
scientific/professional association with the objective
of promoting research and communication in the
domain of knowledge organization, within the broad
field of information science and related disciplines.
The conference organizing team is closely supported
by leading thinkers and practitioners in the knowledge organization arena.

Report of the 11th German ISKO


conference in Contance Febuary 2008
The 11th conference of the German chapter of ISKO
took place from 20 to 22 February 2008 in Constance.
The conference was entitled Knowledge Organization
2008 Repositories of knowledge in digital spaces:
Accessibility, sustainability, semantic interoperability
Wissensorganisation2008 (Wissensspeicher in digitalen Rumen: Nachhaltigkeit, Verfgbarkeit, semantische Interoperabilitt).
There were 33 papers presented and over 70 participants in attendance. The Discussion Panel session
Standardizing Heterogeneity, moderated by Peter
Ohly, took place on 21st February. The speakers
were Winfried Schmitz-Esser (University of Innsbruck), Daniel Kless (University of Utrecht), Vivien

265

Petras (German Social Science Infrastructure Services, Information Centre Bonn) and Ulrich Reimer
(Technical College, St. Gallen). On the last day of
the conference there was an English speaking session
with Thomas H. Baker (Gttingen), Aida Slavic
(London), Claudio Gnoli (Pavia), and Markus Kattenbeck (Regensburg).
A selection of photographs from the Constance
conference are available at http://www.bonn.iz-soz.
de/wiss-org/WissOrg11Fotos/. Abstracts of the
talks will be made available at http://www2.bsz-bw.
de/cms/isko2008. The Proceedings of the 11th German ISKO Conference are now in preparation and
are planned to be published in 2008.
We are also pleased to announce that the newly
elected members of the executive committee of the
German ISKO are Joern Sieglerschmidt, Peter Ohly
and Christian Swertz.
The next, 12th German ISKO conference with the
theme KnowledgeScienceOrganization will be
held in Bonn at the end of 2009.
H. Peter Ohly

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Knowledge Organization Literature

266

Knowledge Organization Literature


Ia C. McIlwaine: Literature Editor

Assisted by: gnes Hajdu Bart, John McIlwaine, Gerhard


Riesthuis, Alenka auperl, Nancy Williamson.
Without their assistance the task would not be possible,
and their help is greatly appreciated.
ICM

0 Form division
02 Literature Reviews in Knowledge Organization
0167
021
Graham, P.J., Dickinson, H.D. Knowledge-system theory
in society: charting the growth of knowledge-system models
over a decade, 1994-2003 (Lang.: eng). In: Journal of the
American Society for Information Science and Technology,
58(2007)14, p.2372-2381.
0168
026
Hedden, H. - Taxonomy tool roundup (Lang.: eng). In:
EContent, 31(2008)3, p.40-44.
04 Classification Systems & Thesauri
0169
042.2
Classificao Decimal Universal; Coordinao Editorial:
Regina Coeli S. Fernndez.
Edition 2a Edio-Padro Internacional em Lngua Portuguesa (Lang.: por). - Braslia: Ministerio de Cincia e Tecnologa. Instituto Brasileiro de Informao em Cincia e
Tecnologia, 2007. 2v. (UDC-P053).
Volume 1. Tabelas sistemticas; 1257 p. ISBN 978-85-7013075-4
Volume 2. Indice alfabtico; 603 p. ISBN 978-85-7013-074-7

von H.P. Ohly, S. Netscher, K. Mitgutsch. (Lang.: ger;


eng). Wrzburg: Ergon Verlag, 2008. x, 287 p.
(Forttschritte in der Wissensorganisation; Bd. 10)
ISBN978-3-89913-620-3. ISSN 0942-0347.
*For the separate papers see (0180), (0182), (0184),
(0186), (0191), (0193), (0194), (0195), (0102), (0202),
(0203), (0204), (0219), (0228), (0229), (0230), (0232),
(0233), (0292), (0294), (0301), (0304), (0319), (0335),
(0337), (0364), (0385), (0386), (0387), (0388), (0399)
0172
06.4-5/06/07; 42
McIlwaine, I.C. Summary and conclusions: Proceedings of
the International Seminar Information access for the global
community [see 0173], p.163-166.
0173
06.4-5/06/07; 42
Proceedings of the International Seminar Information access
for the global community, 4-5 June 2007, The Hague
(Lang.: eng). In: Extensions & corrections to the UDC,
29(2007) p.159-316.
* For separate papers see (0172), (0235), (0256), (2058),
(0261), (0262), (0265), (0269), (0418), (0419)
0174
06.4-5/06/07; 42
auperl, A. Fidler, M.L., Rozman, D., Rozman Salobir, M.
Conclusions from the 2007 Conference on the use of Universal Decimal Classification in Slovenia (Lang.: eng). In:
Extensions & corrections to the UDC, 29(2007) p.21-23
07 Textbooks in Knowledge Organization
0175
07.3
Lescic, J. - Klasifikacija i predmetno oznacivanje: prirucnik
za strucne ispite [Classification and subject indexing: a
handbook for librarianship exams] (Lang.: cro). - Zagreb:
Naklada Dominovic, 2007. - 118 p. - ISBN 978-953-600675-5.

0170
042.5
Revised UDC tables (Lang.: eng). In: Extensions and
corrections to the UDC 29(2007), p.97-157.

1 Theoretical Foundations and general Problems

06 Conference Reports and Proceedings

0176
111
Dahlberg, I. Interview with Ingetraut Daghlberg (Lang.:
eng). In: Knowledge Organization, 35(2008)2/3, p.82-85

0171
06.3-5/07/06
Kompatibilitt, Medien und Ethik in der Wissensorganisation: Proceedings der 10. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion
der Internationalen Gesellschaft fr Wissensorganisation,
Wien, 3.-5. Juli 2006/Compatibility, Media and Ethics in
Knowledge Organization: Proceedings of the 10th Conference of the German Section of the International Society of
Knowledge Organization, Vienna, 3-5 July 2006 / Hrsg.

11 Order and Knowledge Organization

0177
111
Gnoli. C. Ten long-term questions in Knowledge Organization (Lang.: eng). In: Knowledge Organization,
35(2008)2/3, p.137-149.

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Knowledge Organization Literature

0178
111
Hjrland, B. What is Knowledge Organization (KO)?
(Lang.: eng). In: Knowledge Organization, 35(2008)2/3,
p.86-101.
0179
111
McIlwaine, I.C., Mitchell, J.S. Preface to special issue
What is Knowledge Organization (Lang.: eng). In:
Knowledge Organization, 35(2008)2/3, p.79-81.

267

14 System Theory and Knowledge Organization


0188
142
Feinberg, M. - Hidden bias to responsible bias: an approach
to information systems based on Haraway's situated knowledges (Lang.: eng). In: Information Research 12(2007)
Supplement, p.1-13.
15 Psychology and Knowledge Organization

0180
111
San Segundo Manuel, R. - From the invalidity of a general
classification theory to a new organization of knowledge for
the millennium to come (Lang.: eng). In: Kompatibilitt,
Medien und Ethik in der Wissensorganisation [see 0171],
p.12-17.

0189
156; 981
Rorissa, A., Iyer, H. - Theories of cognition and image categorization: what category labels reveal about basic level theory (Lang.: eng). In: Journal of the American Society for
Information Science & Technology, 59(2008)9, p.13831392.

0181
111
Thompson, P. - Looking back: on relevance, probabilistic indexing and information retrieval (Lang.: eng). In: Information Processing and Management, 44(2008)2, p. 963-970.

17 Problems in Knowledge Organization

0182
112
Rabl, C. - Das Nichtwissen in der Wissensorganisation. ber
die verschiedenen Arten nicht zu wissen und ihre Bedeutung fr die Wissensorganisation [Ignorance in Knowledge
Organization. Types of ignorance and their importance for
Knowledge Organization] (Lang.: ger). In: Kompatibilitt, Medien und Ethik in der Wissensorganisation [see
0171], p.7-11.

0190
171
Menon, B. - Optimiser l'Acces a l'Information, une Opportunite pour les Langages Documentaires? [Optimizing access to information, an opportunity for documentary languages? (Lang.: fr). In: Documentaliste, 44(2007)6,
p.385-8.

0183
113
Lpez-Huertas, M.J. Some current research questions in
the field of Knowledge Organization (Lang.: eng). In:
Knowledge Organization, 35(2008)2/3, p.113-136.

0191
171
Schrammel, S. - neue wissensrume?! berlegungen zur Untersuchung qualitativ neuer Raumverhltnisse als Implikationen der Wissensorganisation im Zeitalter neuer Medien
[new knowledge spaces?! Considerations regarding the
analysis of qualitative new space relations as implications
of Knowledge-Organization in the decade of new media]
(Lang.: ger). In: Kompatibilitt, Medien und Ethik in der
Wissensorganisation [see 0171], p.188-193.

0184
115
Rahmstorf. G. Zur Standortbestimmung der Wissensorganisation [Determining positions of Knowledge Organization] (Lang.: ger). In: Kompatibilitt, Medien und Ethik
in der Wissensorganisation [see 0171], p.2-6.

0192
178; 981
Nageswara Rao, K., Talwar, V. G. - Application domain and
functional classification of Recommender Systems a survey
(Lang.: eng). - In: DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology, 28(2008)3, p.17-35.

12 Conceptology in Knowledge Organization

18 Classification and Indexing Research

0185
122
Tennis, J. T., et. al. - Extending the simple knowledge organization system for concept management in vocabulary development applications (Lang.: eng). In: Journal of the
American Society for Information Science and Technology,
59(2008)1, p.25-37.

0193
186
Dippold, C. Wissensverwaltung und Wissensrecherche
durch Integration eines Metadatenkonzepts im FDZ-RV
[Knowledge Management and knowledge research by integration of a metaconcept into FDZ-RV] (Lang.: ger). In:
Kompatibilitt, Medien und Ethik in der Wissensorganisation [see 0171], p.161-180.

0186
124
Breitenstein. M. - Indexing models as social systems (Lang.:
eng). In: Kompatibilitt, Medien und Ethik in der Wissensorganisation [see 0171], p.18-23.
0187
124
Tennis, J.T. Epistemology, theory and methodology in
Knowledge Organization: toward a classification, metatheory
and research framework (Lang.: eng). In: Knowledge Organization, 35(2008)2/3, p.102-112.

19 History of Knowledge Organization


0194
191
Kroop, S. Wissensorganisation im Medium zunehmender
Komplexitt. Der enzyklopdische Wandel vom 15. 2. Jahrhundert [Knowledge Organization in the medium of increasing complexity. The encyclopaedic change from the 15th to
the 20th century] (Lang.: ger). In: Kompatibilitt, Medien
und Ethik in der Wissensorganisation [see 0171], p.202-220.

268

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Knowledge Organization Literature

0195
191
Ohly, H.P. Was bedeutet Entwicklung? Wissensorganisation im Rckblick [What denotes evolution? Knowledge
Organization in retrospect] (Lang.: ger). In: Kompatibilitt, Medien und Ethik in der Wissensorganisation [see
0171], p.222-226.

22 Structure and elements of CS & T

2 Classification Systems and Thesauri, Structure


and Construction

0206
224
Green, R. Relationships in Knowledge Organization
(Lang.: eng). In: Knowledge Organization, 35(2008)2/3,
p.150-159.

21General Problems of Classification Systems and Thesauri


0196
211
Hjrland, B. - Core classification theory: a reply to Szostak
(Lang.: eng). In: Journal of Documentation, 64(2008)3,
p.333-342.
0197
211
Szostak, R. - Classification, interdisciplinarity and the study
of science (Lang.: eng). - In: Journal of Documentation
64(2008)3, p. 319-332.

0205
223
Mai, J.-E. - Actors, domains, and constraints in the design
and construction of controlled vocabularies (Lang.: eng).
In: Knowledge Organization, 35(2008)1, p. 16-29.

0207
224
Mazzocchi, F., Tiberi, M., De Santis, B., Plini, P. Relational semantics in thesauri: an overview and some remarks
at theoretical and practical levels (Lang.: eng). In: Knowledge Organization, 34(2007)4, p.196-213.

0198
212
Hedden, H. - Controlled vocabularies, thesauri, and taxonomies (Lang.: eng). In: The Indexer, 26(2008)1, p.33-4.

0208
225
Heesemann, S., et al. - Facettierte Wissensordnungen und
dynamisches Klassieren als Hilfsmittel der Erforschung des
Dark Web [Faceted knowledge organization and dynamic
classing as a remedy for the investigation of the Dark Web]
(Lang.: ger). In: Information (Frankfurt am Main, Germany), 59(2008)2, p.108-117.

0199
214
DeRidder, J.L. The immediate prospects for the application
of ontologies in digital libraries (Lang.: eng). In: Knowledge Organization, 34(2007)4, p.227-246.

0209
225
Olson, T.A. Utility of a faceted catalogue for scholarly research (Lang.: eng). In: Library Hi-Tech, 25(2007)4,
p.550-561.

0200
214
Krause, J. - Semantic heterogeneity: comparing new semantic
web approaches with those of digital libraries (Lang.: eng).
In: Library Review, 57(2008)3, p.235-248.

0210
225
Prasad, A.R.D., Madalli, D. P. - Faceted infrastructure for
semantic digital libraries (Lang.: eng). In: Library Review,
57(2008)3, p.225-234.

0201
214
Poli, R. - Upper ontologies hold it together (Lang.: eng).
In: Kompatibilitt, Medien und Ethik in der Wissensorganisation [see 0171], p.138-144.

0211
225
Slavic, A. - Faceted classification: management and use
(Lang: eng). In: Axiomathes, 18(2008)2, p.257-271.

0202
214
Schmitz-Esser, W. Formalizing terminology-based knowledge for an ontology independently of a particular language
(Lang.: eng). In: Kompatibilitt, Medien und Ethik in der
Wissensorganisation [see 0171], p.124-137.
0203
214
Schmitz-Esser, W. - Ontologies what are they good for, and
do they help us much? (Lang.: eng). In: Kompatibilitt,
Medien und Ethik in der Wissensorganisation [see 0171],
p.122-123.
0204
214; 585
Zimmermann, K. A research ontology for telecommunications (Lang.: eng). In: Kompatibilitt, Medien und Ethik
in der Wissensorganisation [see 0171], p.146-153.

0212
225
Vickery, B.C. - Faceted classification for the Web (Lang.:
eng). In: Axiomathes, 18(2008)2, p.145-160.
0213
226
Rotaru, D. - Constituirea Listei de vedete de subiect enciclopedice romneti (LIVES-RO) Programul RAMEAU
[Building the encyclopedic list of subject headings in Romanian (LIVES-RO) the RAMEAU Program] (Lang.:
rom) -. In: Informare i documentare: lucrri ale sesiunilor
profesional : 2007. Bucureti: Editura Bibliotecii Naionale
a Romniei, 2007, p.63-65
0214
226
auperl, A., Rozman, D. - Subject cataloguing at the crossroads : with or without subject heading strings? (Lang.: slo).
In: Knjinice za prihodnost : napredek in sodelovanje : zbornik referatov [ Libraries for the future : development and
collaboration: proceedings / Professional conference of
Union of associations of Slovene Librarians], Portoro,
October 22-23, 2007; ed. M. Ambroi, p.129-150.

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Knowledge Organization Literature

- Ljubljana: Zveza bibliotekarskih drutev Slovenije, 2007.


- ISBN 978-961-6683-01-2.
0215
229
Trentin, G. Graphic tools for knowledge representation and
informational problem-based learning in professional online
communities (Lang.: eng). In: Knowledge Organization,
34(2007)4, p.215-226.

269

25 Numerical Taxonomy
0224
251
Sharma, R.S., Foo, S., Morales-Arroyo, M. Developing
corporate taxonomies for knowledge auditability: a framework for good practices (Lang.: eng). In: Knowledge Organization, 35(2008)1, p.30-46.

0216
232
Zeng, M.L. Knowledge Organization systems (Lang.: eng).
In: Knowledge Organization, 35(2008)2/3, p.160-182.

0225
252
Dang, E.K.F., Luk, R.W.P., Ho, K.S., Chan, S.C.F., Lee,
D.I. A new measure of clustering effectiveness: algorithms
and experimental studies (Lang.: eng). In: Journal of the
American Society for Information Science & Technology,
59(2008)3, p.390-416.

0217
238
Saha, R. - Designing of a classification scheme for Bengali
books (Lang: eng). In: IASLIC Bulletin, 52(2007)3,
p.133-136.

0226
255
Auger, A., Barrire, C. Pattern-based approaches to semantic relation extraction (Lang.: eng). In: Terminology,
14(2008)1, p.1-19.

24 Relationships

28 Compatibility and Concordances between Indexing


Languages

23 Construction of Classification Systems and Thesauri

0218
241
Aussenac-Gilles, N., Jacques, M.-P. Designing and evaluating patterns for relation acquisition from texts with
CAMLON (Lang.: eng). In: Terminology, 14(2008)1,
p.45-73.
0219
241
Mazzocchi, F., Plini, P. Refining thesaurus relational structure: implications and opportunities (Lang.: eng). In:
Kompatibilitt, Medien und Ethik in der Wissensorganisation [see 0171], p.24-34.
0220
241
Sierra, G., Alarcn, R., Aguilar, C., Bach, C. Definitional
verbal patterns for semantic relation extraction (Lang.: eng).
In: Terminology, 14(2008)1, p.74-98.
0221
246
Wolfram, D., Zhang, J. - The influence of indexing practices
and weighting algorithms on document spaces (Lang.: eng).
In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 59(2008)1, p.3-11.
0222
246; 349
Oyarce, G. - Using the shape recovery method to evaluate
indexing techniques (Lang.: eng). In: Journal of the
American Society for Information Science & Technology,
59(2008)9, p.1479-1492.
0223
247
Botea, V., Mallett, D., Nascimento, M., Sander, J. - PIST:
an efficient and practical indexing technique for historical
spatio-temporal point data (Lang.: eng). In: GeoInformatica, 12(2008)2, p.143-168.

0227
281
Nicholson, D. - Help us make HILT's terminology services
useful in your information service (Lang: eng). In: D-Lib
Magazine,14(2008)3/4. Available at: http://www.dlib.org/
dlib/march08/03inbrief.html#NICHOLSON
0228
283
Dahlberg, I. Kompatibilitt und Integration: Probleme
und Lsungen in der Wissensorganisation [Compatibility
and integration: problems and solutions in Knowledge Organization] (Lang.: ger). In: Kompatibilitt, Medien und
Ethik in der Wissensorganisation [see 0171], p.35-49.
0229
283
Garca Marco, F.J. - Compatibility & heterogeneity in
Knowledge Organization: some reflections around a case
study in the field of consumer information (Lang.: eng). In:
Kompatibilitt, Medien und Ethik in der Wissensorganisation [see 0171], p.96-109.
0230
283
Mitgutsch, K. Inkompatibilitt in der Wissensorganisation.
ber die produktive Negativitt im Lernprozess [Incompatibility in Knowledge-Organization. On productive negativisms in learning processes] (Lang.: ger). In: Kompatibilitt, Medien und Ethik in der Wissensorganisation [see
0171], p.194-201.
0231
285
McCulloch, E., Macgregor, G. - Analysis of equivalence
mapping for terminology services (Lang.: eng). In: Journal
of Information Science, 34(2008)1, p.70-92.
0232
285
Mayr, P., Walter, A.-K. Mapping Knowledge Organization
systems (Lang.: eng). In: Kompatibilitt, Medien und
Ethik in der Wissensorganisation [see 0171], p.80-95.

270

0233
287
Paschen, H. - Zur epistemischen Integration und Integriertheit heterogener Wissensbestnde [About epistemic integration and integratedness in heterogeneous domains of
knowledge] (Lang.: ger). In: Kompatibilitt, Medien und
Ethik in der Wissensorganisation [see 0171], p.52-60.

3 Methodology of Classing and Indexing


31 Theory of Classing and Indexing
0234
313
Agee, V. Controlling our own vocabulary: a primer for indexers working in the world of taxonomy (Lang.: eng). In:
Key Words, 16(2008), 1, p.30-31.

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Knowledge Organization Literature

0242
347
Adeleke, A.A., Olorunsola, R. Cataloguing and classification online: the experience of Redeemers University Library
(Lang.: eng). In: Electronic Library, 25(2007)6, p.725732.
0243
347
Berger, G., et al. - Information visualization for product development in the LIVA project (Lang.: eng). In: InfoTrend, 63(2008)1, p.3-13.
0244
347
Mansour, N., Haraty, R.A., Daher, W., Houri, M. - An
auto-indexing method for Arabic text (Lang.: eng). In: Information Processing & Management, 44(2008)4, p. 15381545.

32 Subject Analysis
0235
323
Gnoli, C. Progress in synthetic classification: towards
unique definition of concepts (Lang.: eng). In: Proceedings
of the International Seminar Information access for the
global community [see 0173], p.167-182.
0236
325
Ballestra, L. - L'indicizzazione semantica al tempo del web
[Semantic indexing in the time of the web] (Lang.: it).
In: Biblioteche Oggi, 26(2008)2, p.57-62.

0245
347
Yang, C. C., Wang, F. L. - Hierarchical summarization of
large documents (Lang.: eng). In: Journal of the American
Society for Information Science & Technology, 59(2008)6,
p.887-902.
0246
348
Leroy, G., Miller, T., Rosemblat, G., Browne, A. - A balanced approach to health information evaluation: a vocabulary-based nave Bayes classifier and readability formulas
(Lang.: eng). In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 59(2008)9, p.1409-1419.

33 Classing and Indexing Techniques


0237
331
Lewis, K. M., Degroote, S.L. - Digital reference access
points: an analysis of usage (Lang.: eng). In: Reference
Services Review, 36(2008)2, p.194-204.
34 Classing and Indexing
0238
344
Britt, B. L., Berry, M. W., Browne, M., Merrell, M. A., Kolpack, J. - Document classification techniques for automated
technology readiness level analysis (Lang.: eng). In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science &
Technology, 59(2008)4, p.675-80.
0239
344
Halskov, J., Barrire, C. Web-based extraction of semantic
relation instances for terminology work (Lang.: eng). In:
Terminology, 14(2008)1, p.20-44.

0247
348
Ringltetter, C., Stubbe, A. - Practical aspects of automatic
genre classification (Lang.: eng). In: Bulletin of the
American Society for Information Science & Technology,
34(2008)5, p.27-30.
0248
348; 827
Golub, K., Hamon, T., Ardo, A. Automated classification
of textual documents based on a controlled vocabulary in engineering (Lang.: eng). In: Knowledge Organization,
34(2007)4, p.247-263.
0249
349
Pong, J.Y.-H., Kwok, R. C.-W., Lau, R.Y.-K., Hao, J.-X.,
Wong, P. C.-C. - A comparative study of two automatic document classification methods in a library setting (Lang.: eng).
In: Journal of Information Science, 34(2008)2, p.213-230.
35 Manual and Automatic Order Techniques

0240
344
Medelyan, O., Witten, I. H. - Domain-independent automatic keyphrase indexing with small training sets (Lang.:
eng). In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 59(2008)7, p.1026-1040.

0250 357
Nappila, T., Jarvelin, K., Niemi, T. A tool for data cube
constriction from structurally heterogeneous XML documents
(Lang.: eng). In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 59(2008)3, p.435-449.

0241
344
Rishel, T., et al. - Determining the context of text using augmented latent semantic indexing (Lang.: eng). In: Journal
of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 58(2007)14, p.2197-2204.

0251
357
Yunyao Li, Huahai Yang, Jagadish, H. V. - NaLIX: a generic
natural language search environment for XML data (Lang.:
eng). In: ACM Transactions on Database Systems,
32(2007)4, p.1-44.

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Knowledge Organization Literature

271

0252
396
Arendt, J. - Imperfect Tools: Google Scholar vs. traditional
commercial library databases (Lang.: eng). In: Against the
Grain, 20(2008)2, p.26-30.

0260
42
Nicolae, D. - Indexul alfabetic CZU: consideraii generale
[The alphabetical index to the UDC: general considerations] (Lang.: rom). - In: Informare i documentare: lucrri ale sesiunilor profesionale: 2007, p.58-62. - Bucureti:
Editura Bibliotecii Naionale a Romniei, 2007,

0253
396; 827
Mejer, J. J., Conkling, T. W. - Google Scholar's coverage of
the engineering literature: an empirical study (Lang.: eng).
In: Journal of Academic Librarianship, 34(2008)3, p.196201.

0261
42
Pika, J. - Universal Decimal Classification at the ETHBibliothek Zurich a Swiss perspective (Lang.: eng). In:
Proceedings of the International Seminar Information access
for the global community [see 0173], p.229-251.

4 On Universal Classification Systems and


Thesauri

0262
42
Rifl, B. UDC in Slovenia (Lang.: eng). In: Proceedings
of the International Seminar Information access for the
global community [see 0173], p.253-262.

39 Evaluation of Classing and Indexing

41 On Universal Classification Systems and Thesauri in


General
0254
413
Arsenault, C., et al. - Tensions in cataloging: observations on
standards and implementation (Lang.: eng). In: Journal of
Information Ethics, 17(2008)1, p.28-42.
0255
417
Holley, R. P. - Subject access tools in English for Canadian
topics: Canadian extensions to U.S. subject access tools
(Lang.: eng). In: Library Resources & Technical Services,
52(2008)2, p.29-43.
42 On the Universal Decimal Classification
0256
42
Balikov, M. UDC in Czechia (Lang.: eng). In: Proceedings of the International Seminar Information access for
the global community [see 0173], p.191-227.
0257
42
Civallero, E. Common auxiliaries of languages: South
American indigenous languages (Lang.: eng). ). In: Extensions & Corrections to the UDC, 29(2007), 45-58.
0258
42
Frncu, V. - Does convenience trump accuracy? The avatars
of the UDC in Romania (Lang.: eng). In: Proceedings of
the International Seminar Information access for the global
community [see 0173], p.263-272.
0259
42
Leban, V., Grilc, A., Tomi, N. - New systematic shelving
method in the Kranj central library(Lang.: slo). In: Knjinice za prihodnost : napredek in sodelovanje : zbornik referatov [Libraries for the future : development and collaboration: proceedings / Professional conference of Union of
associations of Slovene Librarians], Portoro, October 2223, 2007; ed. M. Ambroi, p.193-208. - Ljubljana : Zveza
bibliotekarskih drutev Slovenije, 2007. - ISBN 978-9616683-01-2.

0263
42
Rifl, B., Musek, T., Razpotnik, ., Rozman, D. - The Slovenian online edition of the Universal Decimal Classification?
(Lang.: slo). In: Knjinice za prihodnost : napredek in
sodelovanje : zbornik referatov [Libraries for the future :
development and collaboration: proceedings / Professional
conference of Union of associations of Slovene Librarians], Portoro, October 22-23, 2007; ed. M. Ambroi,
p.173-192. - Ljubljana : Zveza bibliotekarskih drutev Slovenije, 2007.- ISBN 978-961-6683-01-2.
0264
42
Rozman, D. - Novelties and changes in the Universal Decimal Classification (Lang.:slo). In: olska Knjinica,
17(2007)3-4, p.143-146.
0265
42
Schallier, W. Why organize information if you can find it?
UDC and libraries in an Internet world (Lang.: eng). In:
Proceedings of the International Seminar Information access
for the global community [see 0173], p.183-190.
0266
42
Slavic, A. - Use of the Universal Decimal Classification: a
world-wide survey (Lang.: eng). In: Journal of Documentation, 64(2008)2, p.211-228.
0267
42
Slavic, A., Cordeiro, M.I., Riesthuis, G. Maintenance of the
Universal Decimal Classification: overview of the past and
preparations for the future (Lang.: eng). In: International
Cataloguing & Bibliographic Control, 37(2008)2, p.23-29.
0268
42
Slavic, A., Pika, J., Riesthuis, G., Overfield, C. German
UDC translation project (Lang.: eng). In: Extensions &
Corrections to the UDC, 29(2007) p.11-15.
0269
42
Van der Linden, E.-J., Vliegen, R., van Vijk, J. Visual
Universal Decimal Classification (Lang.: eng). In: Proceedings of the International Seminar Information access for
the global community [see 0173], p.297-300.

272

0270
42
VINITI RAN Update on UDC in Russia (Lang.: eng).
In: Extensions & Corrections to the UDC, 29(2007) p.1719.
0271
42; 651/4
McIlwaine, I.C., Williamson, N.J. Medicine restructuring
completion of phase 1 and the continuing process (Lang.:
eng). - In: Extensions & Corrections to the UDC
29(2007), p.59-94.
43 On the Dewey Decimal Classification
0272
43
Allen, C. - Do we still Dewey? (Lang.: eng). In: Young
Adult Library Services, 6(2008)2, p.14.

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Knowledge Organization Literature

0279
487
Costantea, I., Bot, R.I., Wanka, G. - Patent document classification based on mutual information feature selection (Lang:
it). - In: Italian Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics,
23(2008), p.121-136.
0280
489
Bradford, A. - Adolescent literature in a class by itself?
(Lang.: eng) In: Voice of Youth Advocates, 30(2008)6,
p.508-10.
0281
489
Elazar, D. H. - The making of a classification scheme for libraries of Judaica (Lang.: eng). - In: Judaica librarianship,
14, 2008 (Based on paper presented to 66th IFLA Council
and General Conference, Jerusalem 2000, available at :
http://www.ifla.org/IV/ifla66/papers/080-174e.htm)

44 On the Library of Congress Classification


0273
44; 693
Smiraglia, R.P. - Shelflisting Music: guidelines for use with
the Library of Congress Classification: M. 2nd Edition
(Lang.: eng). - Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press /Music Library Association, 2008. x, 37p. (MLA Technical Report
30). ISBN: 9780810854185
448 On the Library of Congress Subject Headings
0274
448; 918
Qiang Jin. - Is FAST the right direction for a new system of
subject cataloging and metadata? (Lang.: eng). In: Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 45(2008)3, p. 91-110.

0282
489
Houston, C.R. - The use of reading levels as alternative classification in school libraries (Lang.: eng). - In: Cataloging &
Classification Quarterly, 45(2008)4, p.65-80.
0283
489
Lima, C. W., Lima, J.A. - A to zoo: subject access to children's
picture books; supplement to the 7th edition.(Lang.: eng). Westport, CN & London: Libraries Unlimited, 2008. 191
p. ISBN 13-9781-5915-86722

5 On Special Objects Classifications (Taxonomies)


54 On Taxonomies in Bio Biological, Veterinary Science,
Agriculture, Food Sciences, Ecology

45 On the Bliss Bibliographic Classification


0275
45
Broughton, V. - A faceted classification as the basis of a faceted
terminology: conversion of a classified structure to thesaurus
format in the Bliss Bibliographic Classification, 2nd Edition
(Lang.: eng). In: Axiomathes 18(2008)2, p.193-210.
48 On other Universal Classification Systems and
Thesauri
0276
48
Dahlberg, I. - The Information Coding Classification
(ICC): a modern, theory-based fully-faceted, universal system of knowledge fields (Lang.: eng). - In: Axiomathes
18(208)2, p.161-176.
0277
48
Sukiasyan, E. R. - Library-Bibliographical Classification
(LBC): general characteristics and basic functions and prospects for development (Lang.: rus). In: Scientific and
Technical Information Processing C/C of NauchnoTekhnicheskaia Informatsiia Seriia I - 35(2008)1, p.55-61.
0278
485
Satija, M.P., Haynes, D.E. - User's Guide to Sears List of
Subject Headings (Lang.: eng). - Lanham, MD: Scarecrow
Press, 2008. - 160pp. - ISBN: 0-8108-6114-3.

0284
541
Mawatari, S. F. - [Meaning of biological classification]
(Lang.: jap). In: Journal of Information Science and
Technology Association (Joho no Kagaku to Gijutsu),
58(2008)2, p.52-56.
55 On Taxonomies in Human Biology, Medicine,
Psychology, Education, Labour, Sports, Household
0285
551/4
Abe, S. - Database and indexing policy (Lang.: jap). - In:
Journal of Information Science & Technology Association
(Joho no Kagaku to Gijutsu), 58(2008)4, p.172-177.
The article offers information on Medical Subject Headings.

6 On Special Subjects Classifications and Thesauri


62 On C S & T in Physics, Chemistry, Electronics,
Energy
0286
628
Yonezawa, M. - Database and indexing policy (Lang.: jap). In: Journal of Information Science & Technology Association (Joho no Kagaku to Gijutsu), 58(2008)4, p.178-183.

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Knowledge Organization Literature

The article offers information on the database and indexing policy for the International Nuclear Information System (INIS).

273

(Lang.: eng). In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 59(2008)3, p.407-421.
72 Semantics

64 On C S & T in Biological, Veterinary Science,


Agriculture, Food Sciences, Ecology
0287
646
Sini, M., Lauser, B., Salokhe, G., Keizer, J., Katz, S. - The
AGROVOC concept server: rationale, goals and usage
(Lang.: eng). In: Library review, 57(2008)3, p.200-212.
65 On C S & T in Human Biology, Medicine,
Psychology, Education, Labour, Sports, Household
0288
651/4
Eerola, J., Vakkari, P. How a general and a specific thesaurus cover expressions in patients questions and physicians
answers (Lang.: eng). In: Journal of Documentation,
64(2008)1, p.131-142.
0289
651/4
Suzuki, K. - Database and indexing policy (Lang.: jap). In:
Journal of Information Science & Technology Association
(Joho no Kagaku to Gijutsu), 58(2008)4, p.184-187.
The article offers information on the indexing policy and
rules for the Japanese medical bibliographic database
JMEDPlus file.
67 On C S & T in Economy, Management Science,
Mechanical Engineering, Building, Transport
0290
671
Harada, T. - Database and indexing policy (Lang.: jap). - In:
Journal of Information Science & Technology Association
(Joho no Kagaku to Gijutsu), 58(2008)4, p.166-171.
The article discusses the content of indexing policy and the
problem of indexing for commercial bibliographic database.
0291
694
Kujirai, H. [ICONCLASS: Iconographic classification system] (Lang.: jap). In: Journal of Information Science &
Technology Association (Joho no Kagaku to Gijutsu),
58(2008)2, p.57-63.

0294
721
Panzer, M. Semantische Integration heterogener und unterschiedlichsprachiger Wissensorganisationssysteme: CrissCross
und jenseits [Semantic integration of heterogeneous and
heterolingual Knowledge Organization systems: CrissCross and beyond] (Lang.: ger). In: Kompatibilitt, Medien und Ethik in der Wissensorganisation [see 0171], p.
61-69.
0295
725
Zhao Rongying, Cheng In. The notion and characters of
knowledge networks (Lang.: eng). In: Knowledge Organization, 35(2008)1, p.47-55.
0296
727
Resmani, A., Rosti, L. - Semantic retail: towards a crosscontext information architecture (Lang.: eng). In: Knowledge Organization, 35(2008)1, p.5-15.
73 Automatic Language Processing
0297
733
Rokaya, M., et al. - Ranking of field association terms using
Co-word analysis (Lang.: eng). - In: Information Processing & Management, 44(2008)2, p.738-55.
0298
733
Zhang, M., Zhou, G., Aw, A. - Exploring syntactic structured features over parse trees for relation extraction using
kernel methods (Lang.: Eng). In: Information Processing
& Management, 44(2008)2, p.687-701.
74 Grammar Problems
0299
743;751
Fersini, E., Messina, E., Archetti, F. - Enhancing web page
classification through image-block importance analysis
(Lang.: eng). In: Information Processing & Management,
44(2008)4, p.1431-1447.
75 On-Line Retrieval Systems and Technologies

7 Knowledge Representation by Language and


Terminology
71 General Problems of Natural Language in Relation to
Knowledge Organization
0292
711
Rahmstorf, G. Die Bedeutung der Sprache in der Wissensorganisation [The relevance of language in Knowledge Organization] (Lang.: ger). In: Kompatibilitt, Medien und
Ethik in der Wissensorganisation [see 0171], p.233-239.
0293
718
Can, F., Kocberber, S., Balcik, E., Kaynak, C., Ocalan, H.
C., Vursavas, O.M. - Information retrieval on Turkish texts

751 General and Theoretical Problems


0300
751
Kim, S.H., Yu, B., Chang, J.-y. - Zoned-partitioning of treelike access methods (Lang.: eng). In: Information Systems, 33(2008)3, p.315-331.
0301
751
Nentwich, M. Technologiegebundene Wissensorganisation
in der Wissenschaft [Technology-based Knowledge Organization in academia] (Lang.: ger). In: Kompatibilitt, Medien und Ethik in der Wissensorganisation [see 0171],
p.231-232.

274

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Knowledge Organization Literature

0302
751
Omekwu, C.O. - Cataloguers in a global information network environment (Lang.: eng). In: Electronic Library,
26(2008)2, p.188-201.

0311
752
Powell, C. K. - OPAC integration in the era of mass digitization: the MBooks experience (Lang: eng). - Library Hi Tech,
26(2008)1, p.24-32.

0303
751
Pivec, F., ercar, T. - Vloga kulturnega konteksta pri nastajanju knjininih informacijskih sistemov v mrei
COBISS.NET [The role of cultural context in the development of library information systems in the network
COBISS.NET] (Lang.: slo). In: Organizacija Znanja,
12(2007)4.
Available at: http://splet02.izum.si/cobiss-oz/news.jsp?apl=/
2007_4/ar04.jsp

0312
752
auperl, A., Saye, J. D. - Have we made any progress? :
Catalogues of the future revisited (Lang.: slo). In: Knjinice za prihodnost : napredek in sodelovanje : zbornik referatov
[Libraries for the future : development and collaboration :
proceedings / Professional conference of Union of associations of Slovene Librarians], Portoro, October 22-23,
2007; ed. M. Ambroi, p.77-89. - Ljubljana: Zveza bibliotekarskih drutev Slovenije, 2007. - ISBN 978-961-668301-2.

0304
751
Stempfhuber, M. Verbesserung der Zugnglichkeit heterogen erschlossener Informationen [Enhancing access to heterogeneous information] (Lang.: ger). In: Kompatibilitt,
Medien und Ethik in der Wissensorganisation [see 0171],
p.70-79.
0305
751;911
Martnez-Uribe, L., Macdonald, S. - Un nuevo cometido
para los bibliotecarios acadmicos: data curation (Lang.: sp).
[A new role for the academic librarian: data curation]. In:
El Profesional de la Informacin, 17(2008)3, p.273-280.
752 Dialogue systems. Interactive catalogues
0306
752
Ansari, M.A., Amita. Awareness and use of OPACS in
five Delhi libraries (Lang.: eng). In: Electronic Library,
26(2008)1, p.111-129.
0307
752
Marchitelli, A., Piazzini, T. -OPAC, SOPAC e social networking: cataloghi di biblioteca 2.0? [OPAC, SOPAC and
social networking: catalogues of Library 2.0?] (Lang.: it)
In: Biblioteche Oggi 26(2008)2, p.82-92.
0308
752
Merun, T., umer, M. - Library catalogues : rich tradition
facing new challenges (Lang.: slo). In: olska Knjinica,
17(2007)3-4, p.137-142.
0309
752
Merun, T.- Online library catalogues of the future revisited
(Lang.: slo). In: Knjinice za prihodnost : napredek in
sodelovanje : zbornik referatov [Libraries for the future :
development and collaboration : proceedings / Professional conference of Union of associations of Slovene Librarians], Portoro, October 22-23, 2007; ed. M. Ambroi, p.
91-104. - Ljubljana: Zveza bibliotekarskih drutev Slovenije, 2007. - ISBN 978-961-6683-01-2.

0313
752
Turbanti, S. - La bonifica del catalogo e il controllo di qualit: strumenti, tempi, strategie [Catalogue reclamation and
quality control: means, times and strategies] (Lang: it).
In: Bollettino AIB, 47(2007)4, p.451-459.
0314
752
Xiao, D., Fullerton, J. P. - Developing utility tools to enhance Voyager access, search and workflow automation
(Lang: eng). - Library Hi Tech, 26(2008)1 p.95-109.
0315
752
Zuehlke, D., Thiels, N. - Useware engineering: a methodology for the development of user-friendly interfaces (Lang.:
eng). In: Library Hi Tech, 26(2008)1, p.126-140.
0316
752;226
Papadakis, I., Stefanidakis, M., Tzali, A. - Visualizing
OPAC subject headings (Lang: eng). In: Library Hi Tech,
26(2008)1, p.19-23.
0317
752; 88-39
Vandenburg, M. - Using Google maps as an interface for the
library catalogue (Lang.: eng). In: Library Hi Tech,
26(2008)1, p.33-40.
0318
752.2
Xu, Y., Yin, H. - Novelty and topicality in interactive information retrieval (Lang.: eng). In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology,
59(2008)2, p.201-215.
0319
752.3; 878
Sieglerschmidt, J. Convergence of Internet services in the
cultural heritage sector the long way to common vocabularies, metadata formats, ontologies (Lang.: eng). In: Kompatibilitt, Medien und Ethik in der Wissensorganisation
[see 0171], p.154-160.
753 Online Access, Queries, Free Text Searching

0310
752
Mi, J., Weng, C. - Revitalizing the library OPAC: interface,
searching and display challenges (Lang.: eng). - Information
Technology & Libraries, 27(2008)1, p.5-22.

0320
753
Kova, M. P. - Paradoxes of cyberspace: why an e-book exists
predominantly on paper? (Lang.:slo). Knjinica,
51(2007)3-4, p.9-21.

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Knowledge Organization Literature

0321
753; 918; 651/4
Hemminger, B.M., Saelim, B., Sullivan, P.F., Vision, T.J.
Comparison of full-text searching to metadata searching for
genes in two biomedical literature cohorts (Lang.: eng). In:
Journal of the American Society for Information Science
& Technology, 58(2007)14, p.2341-2352.
755 Problems of on-line systems. Searching
0322
755
Dorman, D. - The potential of metasearching as an open
service (Lang.: eng). In: Library Hi Tech, 26(2008)1,
p.58-67.
0323
755
Iglesias, E., Hye, S. S. - Topic maps and the ILS: an undelivered promise (Lang.: eng). In: Library Hi Tech,
26(2008)1, p.12-18.
0324
755; 88-82
Sluga, M. - Google and information resources in library and
information science: a comparative analysis (Lang.:slo).
Knjinica, 51(2007)3-4, p.23-40.

275

ternational Journal of
65(2007)7, p.674-688.

Human-Computer

Studies,

0332
757
Zhang, W. [Incremental data mining strategy for inconsistent information system based on rough analysis] (Lang.:
chi). In: Journal of the China Society for Scientific &
Technical Information, 27(2008)1, p.30-34.
0333
757; 982
Islam, A., Panda, K.C. Web-based information retrieval
trends of researchers: a case study of Sambalpur University
(India) (Lang.: eng). In: Electronic Library, 25(2007)6,
p.757-765.
77 Problems of Terminology
0334
777
Oard, D.W., He, D., Wang, J. - User-assisted query translation for interactive cross-language information retrieval
(Lang.: eng). In: Information Processing & Management,
44(2008)1, p.181-211.
78 Subject-Oriented Terminology Work

757 Expert Systems in Searching. Search Engines


0325
757
Austin, A., Harris, C. - Welcome to a new paradigm (Lang.:
eng). In: Library Technology Reports, 44(2008)4, p.5-7.
0326
757
Chen, C.-C., Chen, A.-P. Using data mining technology to
provide a recommendation service in the digital library
(Lang.: eng). In: Electronic Library, 25(2007)6, p.711724.
0327
757
Joint, N. - The practitioner librarian and the semantic web
(Lang.: eng). In: Library Review, 57(2008)3, p.178-186.

0335
78-66
Nentwich, M. Knowledge Base Law eine neuartige Wissensbasis im juristischen Bereich [Knowledge Base Law a
novel base of knowledge for the juristical domain] (Lang.:
ger). In: Kompatibilitt, Medien und Ethik in der Wissensorganisation [see 0171], p.274-283.
79 Problems of Multilingual and Cross-Language
Systems and Translation
0336
795
Yeh, J.-F., Wu, C.-H., Chen, M.-J. - Ontology-based speech
act identification in a bilingual dialog system using partial
pattern trees (Lang.: eng). In: Journal of the American
Society for Information Science & Technology, 59(2008)5,
p.684-694.

0328
757
Kucukyilmaz, T., Cambazoglu, B., Aykanat, C., Can, F. Chat mining: Predicting user and message attributes in computer-mediated communication (Lang.: eng). In: Information Processing & Management, 44(2008)4, p.1448-1466.

8 Applied Classing and Indexing

0329
757
Mansourian, Y., Ford, N. Search persistence and failure on
the web: a bounded rationality and satisficing analysis
(Lang.: eng). In: Journal of Documentation, 63(2007)5,
p.680-701.

0337
811
Schmitz-Esser, W. Wissensorganisation und Nutzung [Organizing knowledge and putting Knowledge Organization
to use] (Lang.: ger). In: Kompatibilitt, Medien und
Ethik in der Wissensorganisation [see 0171], p.227-230.

0330
757
Mansourian, Y., Ford, N. Web searchers attributions of
success and failure: an empirical study (Lang.: eng). In:
Journal of Documentation, 63(2007)5, p.659-679.

82 C&I in Medicine

0331
757
Pike, W., Gahegan, M. - Beyond ontologies: toward situated
representations of scientific knowledge (Lang.: eng). In: In-

81 General Problems

0338
82-52/54
Abdou, S., Savoy, J. - Searching in MEDLINE: query expansion and manual indexing evaluation (Lang.: eng). In:
Information Processing & Management, 44(2008)2, p.781789.

276

0339
82-51/4
Bornmann, L., et al. - Are there better indices for evaluation
purposes than the h index? A comparison of nine different
variants of the h index using data from Biomedicine (Lang.:
eng). In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 59(2008)5, p.830-7.
0340
82-51/4
Humphrey, S.M., Rogers, W.J., Kilicoglu, H., DemnreFushman, D., Rindflesch, T.C. Word sense disambiguation
by selecting the best semantic type based on journal descriptor
indexing: preliminary experiment (Lang.: eng). In: Journal
of the American Society for Information Science & Technology 57(2006)1, p.96-113.
83 Titled classing and Indexing. Derived Indexing,
Folksonomy
0341
835
Peterson, E. - Parallel systems: the coexistence of subject cataloging and folksonomy (Lang.: eng). - In: Library Philosophy & Practice (Annual volume 2008), p.1-5.
0342
835
Sinclair, J., Cardew-Hall, M. The folksonomy tag cloud:
when is it useful? (Lang.: eng). In: Journal of Information
Science, 34(2008)1, p.15-29.
84 Primary Literature Classification and Indexing
0343
842
Gamber, T., Friedrich-Nishio, M., Grupp, H. - Science and
technology in standardization: a statistical analysis of merging knowledge structures (Lang.: eng). In: Scientometrics,
74(2008)1, p.89-108.
0344
845
Kemp, R. - Catalog/Cataloging changes and Web 2.0 Functionality: new directions for serials (Lang.: eng). - In: Serials
Librarian, (2008)4, p.91-112.
85 (Back of the) Book Classification and Indexing
0345
851
Crystal, D. - Reverse indexing (Lang: eng). - In: The Indexer, 26(2008)1, p.14-17.
0346
851
Dai Liqun. - Book indexing in China (Lang.: eng). In:
The Indexer, 26(2008)1, p.3-7.
0347
851
Hall, A. - Marketing your indexing business (Lang.: eng).
In: Key Words, 6(2008)2, p.46-59.
0348
851
Houppert, A. M. - Strategies for sizing an index, Part Two:
after the index is completed (Lang.: eng). In: Key Words,
16(2008)2, p.47-48.

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Knowledge Organization Literature

0349
851
Zafran, E. - Pick it up or pass it up? (Lang.: eng). In: Key
Words, 16(2008)2, p.45-55.
0350
852
Marshall, L. - The usefulness of chronological arrangement
for subheadings in book indexes: an examination of the literature (Part Two) (Lang.: eng). In: Key Words, 16(2008)2,
p.56-59.
0351
853
Evans, R. - Indexing computer books: getting started, Part 1
(Lang.: eng). In: Key Words, 16(2008)2, p.60-66. Also
pub. in Information (Frankfurt am Main, Germany),
58(2007)8, p.425-432.
0352
853
Schwerpunktthema Intellektuelles Indexieren [Crucial aspects of intellectual indexing] (Lang: ger). In: Information (Frankfurt am Main, Germany), 58(2007)8, p.389440.
0353
857
Brown, F. - Indexing without context: some thoughts about
the new world of DITA and content management systems
(Lang.: eng). In: Key Words, 16(2008)2, p.49-51.
0354
857
Diepeveen, C. - Indexing software (Lang.: eng). In: Information (Frankfurt am Main, Germany) 58(2007)8,
p.413-420.
86 Secondary Literature Classification and Indexing
0355
864
Antonakis, J., Lalive, R. Quantifying scholarly impact:
IQp versus to Hirsch h (Lang.: eng). In: Journal of the
American Society for Information Science & Technology,
59(2008)6, p.956-969.
0356
864
Bar-Ilan, J. - Infometrics at the beginning of the 21st century:
a review (Lang.: eng). In: Journal of Informetrics, 2
(2008)1, p.1-52.
0357
864
Barnett, G.A., Fink, E.I. Impact of the Internet and
scholar age distribution on academic citation age (Lang.:
eng). In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 59(2008)4, p.526-534.
0358
864
Boormann, L., Daniel, H.-D. What do citation counts
measure? A review of studies on citing behaviour (Lang.:
eng). In: Journal of Documentation, 64(2008)1, p.45-80.
0359
864
Egghe, L., et al. - An h-index weighted by citation impact
(Lang.: eng). In: Information Processing & Management,
44(2008)2, p.770-780.

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Knowledge Organization Literature

0360
864
Eom, S. - All author cocitation analysis and first author cocitation analysis: a comparative empirical investigation (Lang.:
eng). In: Journal of Informetrics, 2 (2008)1, p.53-64.
0361
864
Mayr, P., Mutsche, P., Petras, V. - Reducing semantic complexity in distributed digital libraries: treatment of term
vagueness and document re-ranking (Lang: eng). In: Library Review, 57(2008)3, p.213-224.
0362
864
Miguel, S., Moya-Anegn, F., Herrero-Solana, V. - El anlisis de co-citas como mtodo de investigacin en Bibliotecologa y Ciencia de Ia Informaci [Analysis of co-citations
as a method of investigation in Librarianship and Information Science] (Lang.: spa) In: Investigacion Bibliotecologica, 21(2007), p.139-155.
0363
864
Montesi, M., Owen, J. M. - Research journal articles as
document genres: exploring their role in knowledge organization (Lang.: eng). In: Journal of Documentation,
64(2008)1, p.143-167.
0364
864
Ohly, H.P. Bibliometric mining: added value from document analysis and retrieval (Lang.: eng). In: Kompatibilitt, Medien und Ethik in der Wissensorganisation [see
0171], p.181-186.
0365
864
Reedijk, J., Moed, H.F. - Is the impact of journal impact factors decreasing? (Lang: eng). In: Journal of Documentation, 64(2008)2, p.183-192.
0366
864
Tian, Y., Wen, C., Hong, S. - Global scientific production on
GIS research by bibliometric analysis from 1997 to 2006
(Lang.: eng). In: Journal of Informetrics, 2 (2008)1,
p.65-74.
0367
864
Turk, N. Citation impact of Open Access journals (Lang.:
eng). In: New Library World, 109(2008)1/2, p.65-74.
0368
864
Van Raan, A.F.J. Bibliometric statistical properties of the
100 largest European research universities: prevalent scaling
rules in the science system (Lang.: eng). In: Journal of the
American Society for Information Science & Technology,
59(2008)3, p.461-475.
0369
864;78-41
Singh, G., Moin, A., Nazim, M. - A bibliometric study of
Embelia ribes (Lang.: eng). In: Library Review, 57(2008),
p.289-297.

277

87 Classification and Indexing of Non-Book Materials


370
871
Jansen, B.J. - Searching for digital images on the web (Lang.:
eng). In: Journal of Documentation, 64(2008)1, p. 81101.
371
871
Jia, Z., Amselag, L., Gros, P. - Content-based image retrieval from a large image database (Lang.: eng). In: Pattern Recognition, 41(2008)5, p.1479-1495.
372
871
Kranjc, T., Maver, J. - Subject search of images (Lang.: slo).
In: Knjinica, 51(2007)3-4, p.41-66.
0373
871
Subramanyam Rallabandi, V. P., Sett, S. K. - Knowledgebased image retrieval system (Lang.: eng). In: KnowledgeBased Systems, 21(2008)2, p.89-100.
0374
871
Wan, G., Liu, Z. - Content-based information retrieval and
digital libraries (Lang.:eng). - In: Information technology
& libraries, 27(2008)1, p.41-47.
0375
871
Weihs, J., Howarth, L. C. - (Lang.: eng). - Designating materials: from 'germane terms' to element types. In: Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 45(2008)4, p.3-24.
0376
872
Punitha, P., Guru, D.S. - Symbolic image indexing and retrieval by spatial similarity: an approach based on B-tree
(Lang.: eng). In: Pattern Recognition, 41(2008)6, p.20682085.
0377
875
Lonikar-Fidler, M., Kova, T. - Subject cataloging of
videofilms (Lang.: slo). - In: olska knjinica, 18(2008)1-2,
p.21-37.
0378
875
Lonikar-Fidler, M., Kova, T. - Subject description of
video films (Lang.: slo). In: Knjinice za prihodnost : napredek in sodelovanje : zbornik referatov [Libraries for the
future : development and collaboration : proceedings /
Professional conference of Union of associations of Slovene Librarians], Portoro, October 22-23, 2007; ed. M.
Ambroi, p.151-172. - Ljubljana : Zveza bibliotekarskih
drutev Slovenije, 2007. - ISBN 978-961-6683-01-2.
0379
875
Zhang, Y., Li, Y. A user-centered functional metadata evaluation of moving image collections [Lang.: eng]. In: Journal
of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 59(2008)8, p.1331-1346.
0380
878; 221
Isaac, A., Schlobach, S., Matthezing, H., Zinn, C. - Integrated access to cultural heritage resources through representa-

278

tion and alignment of controlled vocabularies (Lang.: eng).


In: Library Review, 57(2008)3, p.187-199.
88 Classification and Indexing in Subject Fields
0381
88-51/4
Huuskonen, S., Vakkari, P. - Students search process and
outcome in Medline in writing an essay for a class on evidence-based medicine (Lang.: eng). - In: Journal of Documentation, 64(2008)2, p.287-303.
0382
88-92
auperl, A., Harej, V., Merun, T., Jesenovec, T.; Kastelic,
J.K., Plestenjak, B., Vimer Kovaek, U. - Enhancement of
subject description of fiction with annotations images
(Lang.:slo). In: Knjinica, 51(2007)3-4, p.97-115.
0383
88-93
Cary, P. - Music Index Online (Lang.: eng). In: Notes,
64(2008)3, p.555-563.

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Knowledge Organization Literature

0390
912
Yamazaki, H. - [What do classification and classificatory
thinking imply for information professionals?] (Lang.: jap).
In: Journal of Information Science & Technology Association (Joho no Kagaku to Gijutsu), 58(2008)2, p.46-51.
0391
913
Kodri-Dai, E. (ed). - Prvi strokovni standardi za javne
znanstvene knjinice na Slovenskem [The first professional
standards for public scientific libraries in Slovenia]. (Lang.:
slo). Ljubljana : Zveza bibliotekarskih drutev Slovenije :
Narodna in univerzitetna knjinica, 2007 . (Monumenta
bibliothecaria ; 1) - (Knjinica, ISSN 0023-2424. vol. 51
special issue).
0392
918
LeBlanc, J., Kurth, M. - An operational model for library
metadata maintenance (Lang.: eng). In: Library Resources & Technical Services, 52(2008)1, p.54-59.

91 Professional and Organisational Problems in General


and in Institutions

0393
918
Simeoni, F., Yakici, M., Neely, S., Crestani, F. - Metadata
harvesting for content-based distributed information retrieval
(Lang.: eng). In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 59(2008)1, p.12-24.

0384
911
Beghtol, C. - Professional values and ethics in knowledge organization and cataloguing (Lang.: eng). In: Journal of Information Ethics, 17(2008)1, p.12-19.

0394
918
Stvilia, B., Gasser, L. - Value-based metadata quality assessment (Lang.: eng). In: Library & Information Science
Research, 30(2008) p.67-74.

0385
911
Lengauer, E. Analytische Rechsethik im Kontext skularer
Begrndungsdiskurse zur Wrde biologischer Entitten
[Analytical legal ethics in the context of secular justification discourses with respect of dignity of biological entities]
(Lang.: ger). In: Kompatibilitt, Medien und Ethik in der
Wissensorganisation [see 0171], p.251-258.

0395
918; 846
McCutcheon, S., Kreyche, M., Maurer, M. B., Nickerson,
J. - Morphing metadata: maximizing access to electronic theses and dissertations (Lang.: eng). In: Library Hi Tech,
26(2008)1, p.41-57.

9 Knowledge Organization Environment

0386
911
Nagenborg, M. Privatheit Menschenrecht oder eine Frage
des Anstandes? [Privacy a human right or a problem of
etiquette?] (Lang.: ger). In: Kompatibilitt, Medien und
Ethik in der Wissensorganisation [see 0171], p.259-266.
0387
911
van der Walt, M.S. Normative ethics in Knowledge Organisation (Lang.: eng). In: Kompatibilitt, Medien und
Ethik in der Wissensorganisation [see 0171], p.242-250.
0388
911
Weber, K. Ethikcodizes fr die Wissensorganisation [Codes
of ethics for Knowledge Organization] (Lang.: ger). In:
Kompatibilitt, Medien und Ethik in der Wissensorganisation [see 0171], p.267-273.
0389
912
Ruschoff, C. - Competencies for 21st century technical services (Lang.: eng). In: Technicalities, 27(2007)6, p.1-16.

0396
918; 981
Cisco, S. - As ye index, so shall ye retrieve (Lang.: eng).
In: AIIM E-Doc Magazine, 22(2008)2, p.30-31.
92 Persons and Institutions in Knowledge Organization
0397
922
Broughton, V. - Henry Evelyn Bliss- the other immortal or a
prophet without honour? (Lang.: eng). In: Journal of Librarianship & Information Science, 40(2008)1, p.45-58.
0398
924
Camden, B. P. et al. - Reflections on cataloging leadership
(Lang.: eng). In: Library Resources & Technical Services,
52(2008)2, p.23-8.
93 Organization of Classification and Indexing on a
National and International Level
0399
934
umer, M., Clavel-Merrin, G. - TEL-ME-MOR: investigating subject access tools and practices of European national libraries (Lang.: eng). In: Kompatibilitt, Medien und
Ethik in der Wissensorganisation [see 0171], p.110-119.

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Knowledge Organization Literature

0400
934/5
Alaku, M. - A Turkish treasure trove (Lang.: eng). In:
The Indexer, 26(2008)1, p.8-13.
0401
937
Marcum, D. B. - The Library of Congress and cataloging's
future (Lang.: eng). - In: Cataloging & Classification
Quarterly, 45(2008)3, p.3-15.

279

0409
944
Riva, P., Cato, A. - News and events (Lang.: eng). - In: International Cataloguing & Bibliographic Control,
37(2008)1, p.2,17.
0410
944
Wolverton, R.E. Jr., Antelman, K. - The FRBR frontier: applying a new bibliographic model to E-resources (Lang.:eng).
In: Serials Librarian, 53(2008)4, p.213-221.

94 Bibliographic Control. Bibliographic Records


0402
942
Angus, E., Thelwall, M., Stuart, D. General patterns of tag
usage among university groups in Flickr (Lang.: eng). In:
Online Information Review, 32(2008)1, p.89-101.
0403
942
Constantin, V. - Principii de catalogare: studiu comparativ
ntre principiile de la Paris i Principiile de la Frankfurt,
2003 [Cataloguing principles: a comparative study between
the Paris Principles and the Frankfurt Principles, 2003]
(Lang.: rom).- In: Informare i documentare: lucrri ale sesiunilor profesionale: 2007. - Bucureti: Editura Bibliotecii
Naionale a Romniei, 2007, p.53-56.
0404
942
Italian Commission for the Revision of Cataloguing Rules.
New national rules for Italian library catalogues (Lang.:
eng). In: International Cataloguing & Bibliographic
Control, 37(2008)1, p.13-17.

0411
944
umer, M. - Functional requirements for bibliographic
records (FRBR): the end of the road or a bright new future?
(Lang.: slo). In: Knjinice za prihodnost : napredek in
sodelovanje : zbornik referatov [Libraries for the future :
development and collaboration : proceedings / Professional conference of Union of associations of Slovene Librarians], Portoro, October 22-23, 2007; ed. M. Ambroi, p.
105-112. - Ljubljana: Zveza bibliotekarskih drutev Slovenije, 2007. - ISBN 978-961-6683-01-2.
0412
945
Giovannoli, M. L. - UNIMARC e il libro antico Il Gruppo
di lavoro ITALE per la catalogazione informatizzata del materiale antico [UNIMARC and the Italian group for cataloguing rare books] (Lang.: it). In: Bollettino AIB,
p.461-74.
95 Education and Training in Knowledge Organization

0405
944
Dickey,T. J. - FRBRization of a library catalog: better collocation of records, leading to enhanced search, retrieval and
display (Lang.: eng). In: Information Technology & Libraries, 27(2008)1, p.23-32.

0413
951
Miksa, S. D. - Educators: what are the cataloging issues students get excited about? Professional and intellectual appeals
of cataloging and students' misconceptions of a cataloguing
(Lang.: eng). In: Cataloging & Classification Quarterly,
45(2008)3, p. 17-24.

0406
944
Le Boeuf, P., Doerr, M. - Harmonising CIDOC CRM and
FRBR (Lang.: eng). In: International Cataloging & Bibliographic Control, 36(2007)4, p.90-92.

0414
952
Hudson, A. - Training in indexing: the Society of Indexers'
course (Lang.: eng). In:. Information (Frankfurt am
Main, Germany), 58(2007)8, p.407-9.

0407
944
Pisanski, J. -The use of the functional requirements for bibliographic records (FRBR) conceptual model in practice
(Lang.: slo). In: Knjinice za prihodnost : napredek in
sodelovanje : zbornik referatov [Libraries for the future :
development and collaboration : proceedings / Professional conference of Union of associations of Slovene Librarians], Portoro, October 22-23, 2007; ed. M. Ambroi,
p.113-127.
- Ljubljana: Zveza bibliotekarskih drutev Slovenije, 2007.
- ISBN 978-961-6683-01-2.

0415
952
Smiraglia, R. P. - Rethinking what we catalog: documents as
cultural artefacts (Lang.: eng). In: Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 45(2008)3, p.25-37.

0408
944
Pisanski, J., Zumer, M. Functional requirements for bibliographic records: an investigation of two prototypes (Lang.:
eng). In: Program: Electronic Library and Information
Systems, 41(2007)4, p.400-417.

0416
952
Tth M. - Tmatrkpek a knyvtroskpzsben [Topic
maps in library
education] (Lang.: hun). In: Tudomnyos s Mszaki
Tjkoztats, 55(2008)6. Available at:
http://tmt.omikk.bme.hu/show_news.html?sid=5398eb25
53ad704ef2628141ed92210d&issue_id=494&id=4916
0417
957
Kells, K. - Indexing classes offered by the Graduate School
(USDA) (Lang.: eng). In: Information (Frankfurt am
Main, Germany), 58(2007)8, p.410-12.

280

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Knowledge Organization Literature

0418
957
Petr, K. - Education for cataloguing and classification at the
Department of Information Sciences in Osijek, Croatia
(Lang.: eng). In: Cataloging & Classification Quarterly,
45(2008)4, p.25-42.

0422
981
Nazim, M. - Information searching behavior in the Internet
age: a users study of Aligarh Muslim University (Lang.:
eng). In: International Information & Library Review, 40
(2008)1, p.73-81.

0419
957; 42
Hajdu Bart, A. - Multilevel education, training, traditions
and research on UDC in Hungary (Lang.: eng). In: In:
Proceedings of the International Seminar Information access
for the global community [see 0173], p.273-284.

0423
981
Varghese, R. - User studies in the electronic environment:
review and brief analysis (Lang.: eng). In: International
Information & Library Review, 40(2008)2, p.83-93.

0420
957; 42
San Segundo Manuel, R. - Use of the UDC in Spain: implementation, application, teaching and research (Lang.:
eng). In: In: Proceedings of the International Seminar Information access for the global community [see 0173], p.
285-296.
98 User Studies
0421
981
Hider, P. - Catalogue use at the State Library of Victoria
(Lang.: eng). - In: Academic & Research Libraries,
39(2008)1, p.14-25.

0424
981
Xiangmin Zhang, Yuelin Li, Jingjing Liu, Ying Zhang - Effects of interaction design in digital libraries on user interactions (lang.: eng) . In: Journal of Documentation,
64(2008)3, p.438-463.
0425
981
Zhang, X., Li, Y. - Use of collaborative recommendations for
web search: an exploratory user study (Lang.: eng). In:
Journal of Information Science, 34(2008)2, p.145-161.
0426
982
Rosso, M.A. - User-based identification of Web genres
(Lang: eng). - In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 59(2008)7, p.1053-1072.

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Personal Author Index 35(2008)

281

Personal Author Index


Abdou, S. 0338
Abe, S. 0285
Adeleke, A.A. 0242
Agee, V. 0234
Aguilar, C. 0220
Alaku, M. 0400
Alarcn, R. 0220
Alcina, A.
Allen, C. 0272
Amita 0306
Amselag, L. 0371
Angus, E. 0402
Ansari, M.A. 0306
Antelman, K. 0410
Antonakis, J. 0355
Archetti, F. 0299
Ardo, A. 0248
Arendt, J. 0252
Arsenault, C. 0254
Auger, A. 0226
Aussenac-Gilles, N.
0218
Austin, A. 0325
Aw, A. 0298
Aykanat, C. 0328
Bach, C. 0220
Balcik, E. 0293
Balikov, M. 0256
Ballestra, L. 0236
Bar-Ilan, J. 0356
Barnett, G.A. 0357
Barrire, C. 0226,
0239
Beghtol, C. 0384
Benito, M.
Berger, G. 0243
Berry, M. W. 0238
Boormann, L. 0358
Bornmann, L. 0339
Bot, R.I. 0279
Botea, V. 0223
Bradford, A. 0280
Breitenstein. M. 0186
Britt, B. L. 0238
Broughton, V. 0275,
0297
Brown, F. 0353
Browne, A. 0246
Browne, M. 0238
Cambazoglu, B. 0328
Camden, B. P. 0398
Can, F. 0293, 0328
Cardew-Hall, M.
0342

Cary, P. 0383
Cato, A. 0409
Chan, S.C.F. 0225
Chang, J.-y. 0300
Chen, A.-P. 0326
Chen, C.-C. 0326
Chen, M.-J. 0336
Cheng In 0295
Cisco, S. 0396
Civallero, E. 0257
Clavel-Merrin, G.
0399
Conkling, T. W. 0253
Constantin, V. 0403
Cordeiro, M.I. 0267
Costantea, I. 0279
Crestani, F. 0393
Crystal, D. 0345
Daher, W. 0244
Dahlberg, I. 0176,
0228, 0276
Dai Liqun 0346
Dang, E.K.F. 0225
Daniel, H.-D. 0358
De Santis, B. 0207
Degroote, S.L. 0237
Demnre-Fushman,
D. 0340
DeRidder, J.L. 0199
Dickey,T. J. 0405
Dickinson, H.D.0167
Diepeveen, C. 0354
Dippold, C. 0193
Doerr, M. 0406
Dorman, D. 0322
Eerola, J. 0288
Egghe, L. 0359
Elazar, D. H. 0281
Eom, S. 0360
Evans, R. 0351
Feinberg, M.0188
Fersini, E. 0299
Fidler, M.L. 0174
Fink, E.I. 0357
Foo, S.
Ford, N. 0329, 0330
Friedrich-Nishio, M.
0343
Frncu, V. 0258
Fullerton, J. P. 0314
Gahegan, M. 0331
Gamber, T. 0343
Garca Marco, F.J.
0229

Gasser, L. 0394
Giovannoli, M. L.
0412
Gnoli. C. 0177, 0235
Golub, K. 0248
Graham, P.J. 0167
Green, R. 0206
Grilc, A. 0259
Gros, P. 0371
Grupp, H. 0343
Guru, D.S. 0376
Hajdu Bart, A. 0419
Hall, A. 0347
Halskov, J. 0239
Hamon, T. 0248
Hao, J.-X. 0249
Harada, T. 0290
Harris, C. 0325
Haraty, R.A. 0244
Harej, V. 0382
Haynes, D.E. 0278
He, D. 0334
Hedden, H. 0168,
0198
Heesemann, S. 0208
Hemminger, B.M.
0321
Herrero-Solana, V.
0362
Hider, P. 0421
Hjrland, B. 0178,
0196
Ho, K.S. 0225
Holley, R. P. 0255
Hong, S. 0366
Houppert, A. M.
0348
Houri, M. 0244
Houston, C.R. 0282
Howarth, L. C. 0375
Huahai Yang 0251
Hudson, A. 0414
Humphrey, S.M.
0340
Huuskonen, S. 0381
Hye, S. S. 0323
Iglesias, E. 0323
Isaac, A. 0380
Islam, A. 0333
Italian Commission
for the Revision of
Cataloguing Rules
0404
Iyer, H. 0189

Jacques, M.-P. 0218


Jagadish, H. V. 0251
Jansen, B.J. 0370
Jarvelin, K. 0250
Jesenovec, T. 0382
Jia, Z. 0371
Jingjing Liu 0424
Joint, N. 0327
Kastelic, J.K. 0382
Katz, S. 0287
Kaynak, C. 0293
Keizer, J 0287
Kells, K. 0417
Kemp, R. 0344
Kilicoglu, H. 0340
Kim, S.H. 0300
Kocberber, S. 0293
Kodri-Dai, E.
0391
Kolpack, J. 0238
Kova, M. P. 0320
Kova, T. 0377, 0378
Kranjc, T. 0372
Krause, J. 0200
Kreyche, M. 0395
Kroop, S. 0194
Kucukyilmaz, T.
0328
Kujirai, H. 0291
Kurth, M. 0392
Kwok, R. C.-W. 0249
Lalive, R. 0355
Lau, R.Y.-K 0249
Lauser, B. 0287
LeBlanc, J. 0392
Le Boeuf, P. 0406
Leban, V. 0259
Lee, D.I. 0225
Lengauer, E. 0385
Leroy, G. 0246
Lescic, J. 0175
Lewis, K. M. 0237
Li, Y. 0379, 0425
Lima, C. W. 0283
Lima, J.A. 0283
Liu, Z. 0374
Lonikar-Fidler, M.
0377, 0378
Lpez-Huertas, M.J.
0183
Luk, R.W.P. 0225
McCulloch, E. 0231
McCutcheon, S. 0395
Macdonald, S. 0305

Macgregor, G. 0231
McIlwaine, I.C. 0172,
0179, 0271
Madalli, D. P. 0210
Mai, J.-E. 0205
Mallett, D. 0223
Mansour, N. 0244
Mansourian, Y. 0329,
0330
Marchitelli, A. 0307
Marcum, D. B. 0401
Marshall, L. 0350
Marshman, E.
Martnez-Uribe, L.
0305
Matthezing, H. 0380
Maurer, M. B. 0395
Maver, J. 0372
Mawatari, S. F. 0284
Mayr, P. 0232, 0361
Mazzocchi, F. 0207,
0219
Medelyan, O. 0240
Mejer, J. J. 0253
Menon, B. 0190
Merun, T. 0308,
0309, 0382
Merrell, M. A. 0238
Messina, E. 0299
Mi, J. 0310
Miguel, S. 0362
Miksa, S. D. 0413
Miller, T. 0246
Mitchell, J.S. 0179
Mitgutsch, K. 0230
Moed, H.F. 0365
Moin, A. 0369
Montesi, M. 0363
Morales-Arroyo, M.
0224
Moya-Anegn, F.
0362
Musek, T. 0263
Mutsche, P. 0361
Nagenborg, M. 0386
Nageswara Rao, K.
0192
Nappila, T. 0250
Nascimento, M.,
0223
Nazim, M. 0369,
0422
Neely, S. 0393

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4


Personal Author Index 35(2008)

282

Nentwich, M. 0301,
0335
Nicholson, D. 0227
Nickerson, J. 0395
Nicolae, D. 0260
Niemi, T. 0250
Oard, D.W. 0334
Ocalan, H. C. 0293
Ohly, H.P. 0195,
0364
Olorunsola, R. 0242
Olson, T.A. 0209
Omekwu, C.O. 0302
Overfield, C. 0268
Owen, J. M. 0363
Oyarce, G. 0222
Panda, K.C. 0333
Panzer, M. 0294
Papadakis, I. 0316
Paschen, H. 0233
Peterson, E. 0341
Petr, K. 0418
Petras, V. 0361
Piazzini, T. 0307
Pika, J. 0261, 0268
Pike, W. 0331
Pisanski, J. 0407,
0408
Pivec, F. 0303
Plestenjak, B. 0382
Plini, P. 0207, 0219
Poli, R. 0201
Pong, J.Y.-H. 0249
Powell, C. K. 0311
Prasad, A.R.D. 0210
Punitha, P. 0376
Qiang Jin 0274
Rabl, C. 0182
Rahmstorf, G. 0184,
0292

Razpotnik, . 0263
Reedijk, J. 0365
Resmani, A. 0296
Riesthuis, G. 0267,
0268
Rifl, B. 0262, 0263
Rindflesch, T.C. 0340
Ringltetter, C. 0247
Rishel, T. 0241
Riva, P. 0409
Rogers, W.J. 0340
Rokaya, M. 0297
Rorissa, A. 0189
Rosemblat, G. 0246
Rosso, M.A. 0426
Rosti, L. 0296
Rotaru, D. 0213
Rozman, D. 0174,
0214, 0263, 0264
Rozman Salobir, M.
0174
Ruschoff, C. 0389
Saelim, B. 0321
Saha, R.0217
Salokhe, G. 0287
San Segundo Manuel,
R. 0180, 0420
Sander, J. 0223
Satija, M.P. 0278
auperl, A. 0174,
0214, 0312, 0382
Savoy, J. 0338
Saye, J. D. 0312
Schallier, W. 0265
Schlobach, S. 0380
Schmitz-Esser, W.
0202, 0203, 0337
Schrammel, S. 0191
ercar, T. 0303
Sett, S. K. 0373

Sharma, R.S. 0224


Sieglerschmidt, J.
0319
Sierra, G. 0220
Simeoni, F. 0393
Sinclair, J. 0342
Singh, G. 0369
Sini, M. 0287
Slavic, A. 0211, 0266,
0267, 0268
Sluga, M. 0324
Smiraglia, R.P. 0273,
0415
Soler, V.
Stefanidakis, M. 0316
Stempfhuber, M.
0304
Stuart, D. 0402
Stubbe, A. 0247
Stvilia, B. 0394
Subramanyam
Rallabandi, V.
P.0373
Sukiasyan, E. R. 0277
Sullivan, P.F. 0321
Suzuki, K. 0289
Szostak, R. 0197
Talwar, V. G. 0192
Tiberi, M. 0207
Tennis, J.T. 0185,
0187
Thelwall, M. 0402
Thiels, N. 0315
Thompson, P. 0181
Tian, Y. 0366
Tomi, N. 0259
Tth M. 0416
Trentin, G. 0215
Turbanti, S. 0313
Turk, N. 0367

Tzali, A. 0316
Vakkari, P. 0288,
0381
van der Linden, E.-J.
0269
van der Walt, M.S.
0387
Van Raan, A.F.J.
0368
van Vijk, J. 0269
Vandenburg, M. 0317
Varghese, R. 0423
Vickery, B.C. 0212
Vimer Kovaek, U.
0382
VINITI RAN 0270
Vision, T.J. 0321
Vliegen, R. 0269
Vursavas, O. M. 0293
Walter, A.-K. 0232
Wan, G. 0374
Wang, F. L. 0245
Wang, J. 0334
Wanka, G. 0279
Weber, K. 0388
Weihs, J. 0375
Wen, C. 0366
Weng, C. 0310
Williamson, N.J.
0271
Witten, I. H. 0240
Wolfram, D. 0221
Wolverton, R.E. Jr.
0410
Wong, P. C.-C. 0249
Wu, C.-H.0336
Xiangmin Zhang
0424
Xiao, D. 0314
Yuelin Li 0424

Xu, Y. 0318
Yakici, M. 0393
Yamazaki, H. 0390
Yang, C. C. 0245
Yeh, J.-F. 0336
Yin, H. 0318
Ying Zhang 0424
Yonezawa, M. 0286
Yu, B. 0300
Yunyao Li 0251
Zafran, E. 0349
Zeng, M.L. 0216
Zhang, J. 0221
Zhang, M. 0298
Zhang, W. 0332
Zhang, X. 0425
Zhang, Y. 0379
Zhao Rongying 0295
Zhou, G. 0298
Zimmermann, K.
0204
Zinn, C. 0380
Zuehlke, D. 0315
umer, M. 0308,
0399, 0408, 0411

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4

KNOWLEDGE ORGANIZATION
Official Quarterly Journal of the International Society for Knowledge Organization

KO
ISSN 0943 7444

International Journal devoted to Concept Theory, Classification, Indexing and Knowledge Representation

Publisher
ERGON-Verlag GmbH, Keesburgstr. 11, D-97074 Wrzburg
Phone: +49 (0)931 280084; FAX +49 (0)931 282872
E-mail: service@ergon-verlag.de; http://www.ergon-verlag.de

Editor-in-chief (Editorial office)


Dr. Richard P. SMIRAGLIA (Editor-in-Chief), Palmer School of
Library and Information Science, Long Island University, 720
Northern Blvd., Brookville NY 11548 USA.
Email: Richard.Smiraglia@liu.edu

Instructions for Authors


Manuscripts should be submitted electronically (in Word,
WordPerfect, or RTF format) in English only to the editor-inchief and should be accompanied by an indicative abstract of 100
or 200 words. Submissions via email are preferred; submissions
will also be accepted via post provided that submissions are accompanied by a 3.5 diskette encoded in Word, WordPerfect, or
RTF format.
A separate title page should include the article title and the authors name, postal address, and E-mail address, if available. Only
the title of the article should appear on the first page of the text.
To protect anonymity, the authors name should not appear on the
manuscript, and all references in the body of the text and in footnotes that might identify the author to the reviewer should be removed and cited on a separate page. Articles that do not conform
to these specifications will be returned to authors.
Criteria for acceptance will be appropriateness to the field of
the journal (see Scope and Aims), taking into account the merit of
the contents and presentation. The manuscript should be concise
and should conform as much as possible to professional standards
of English usage and grammar. Manuscripts are received with the
understanding that they have not been previously published, are
not being submitted for publication elsewhere, and that if the
work received official sponsorship, it has been duly released for
publication. Submissions are refereed, and authors will usually be
notified within 6 to 10 weeks. Unless specifically requested,
manuscripts and illustrations will not be returned.
The text should be structured by numbered subheadings. It
should contain an Introduction, giving an overview and stating the
purpose, a main body, describing in sufficient detail the materials
or methods used and the results or systems developed, and a conclusion or summary.
Reference citations within the text should have the following
form: (author year). For example, (Jones 1990). Specific page
numbers are optional, but preferred when applicable, e.g. (Jones
1990, 100). A citation with two authors would read (Jones &
Smith, 1990); three or more authors would be: (Jones et al., 1990).
When the author is mentioned in the text, only the date and optional page number should appear in parenthesis e.g. According
to Jones (1990),
References should be listed alphabetically by author at the end
of the article. Author names should be given as found in the
sources (not abbreviated). Journal titles should not be abbreviated.
Multiple citations to works by the same author should be listed
chronologically and should each include the authors name. Arti-

cles appearing in the same year should have the following format:
Jones 2005a, Jones 2005b, etc. Issue numbers are given only
when a journal volume is not through-paginated.
Examples:
Dahlberg, Ingetraut. 1978. A referent-oriented, analytical concept
theory for INTERCONCEPT. International classification 5:
142-51.
Howarth, Lynne C. 2003. Designing a common namespace for
searching metadata-enabled knowledge repositories: an international perspective. Cataloging & classification quarterly
37n1/2: 173-85.
Pogorelec, Andrej and auperl, Alenka. 2006. The alternative
model of classification of belles-lettres in libraries. Knowledge
organization 33: 204-14.
Schallier, Wouter. 2004. On the razors edge: between local and
overall needs in knowledge organization. In McIlwaine, Ia C.
ed., Knowledge organization and the global information society:
Proceedings of the Eighth International ISKO Conference 13-16
July 2004 London, UK. Advances in knowledge organization 9.
Wrzburg: Ergon Verlag, pp. 269-74.
Smiraglia, Richard P. 2001. The nature of a work: implications for
the organization of knowledge. Lanham, Md.: Scarecrow.
Smiraglia, Richard P. 2005. Instantiation: Toward a theory. In
Vaughan, Liwen, ed. Data, information, and knowledge in a
networked world; Annual conference of the Canadian Association
for Information Science London, Ontario, June 2-4 2005.
Available http://www.cais-acsi.ca/2005proceedings.htm.
Footnotes are not permitted; all narration should be included
in the text of the article.
Illustrations should be kept to a necessary minimum and
should be submitted electronically when possible. Photographs
(including color and half-tone) should be scanned with a minimum resolution of 600 dpi and saved as .tif files (Tagged Image
File Format preferred). Tables and figures should be embedded
within the document or, alternatively, saved as separate files with
clear instructions indicating their placement in the text. Tables
should contain a number and title at the top, and all columns and
rows should have headings. All illustrations should be cited in the
text as Figure 1, Figure 2, etc. or Table 1, Table 2, etc. Illustrations
submitted in hard copy only should be marked to indicate their
placement in the text.
Upon acceptance of a manuscript for publication, authors must
provide a wallet-size photo and a one-paragraph biographical
sketch. The photograph should be scanned with a minimum resolution of 600 dpi and saved as a .tif file (Tagged Image File Format).

Advertising
Responsible for advertising: ERGON-Verlag GmbH, Keesburgstr. 11, 97074 Wrzburg (Germany).
2008 by ERGON-Verlag GmbH.
All Rights reserved.

KO is published quarterly by ERGON-Verlag GmbH.


The price is 129,00/ann. including airmail delivery.

Knowl. Org. 35(2008)No.4

KO

KNOWLEDGE ORGANIZATION

Official Quarterly Journal of the International Society for Knowledge Organization

ISSN 0943 7444

International Journal devoted to Concept Theory, Classification, Indexing and Knowledge Representation

Scope

Aims

The more scientific data is generated in the impetuous


present times, the more ordering energy needs to be expended
to control these data in a retrievable fashion. With the abundance of knowledge now available the questions of new solutions to the ordering problem and thus of improved classification systems, methods and procedures have acquired unforeseen significance. For many years now they have been the focus of interest of information scientists the world over.
Until recently, the special literature relevant to classification was published in piecemeal fashion, scattered over the
numerous technical journals serving the experts of the various
fields such as:

Thus, KNOWLEDGE ORGANIZATION is a forum for


all those interested in the organization of knowledge on a universal or a domain-specific scale, using concept-analytical or
concept-synthetical approaches, as well as quantitative and
qualitative methodologies. KNOWLEDGE ORGANIZATION also addresses the intellectual and automatic compilation and use of classification systems and thesauri in all fields
of knowledge, with special attention being given to the problems of terminology.
KNOWLEDGE ORGANIZATION publishes original
articles, reports on conferences and similar communications,
as well as book reviews, letters to the editor, and an extensive
annotated bibliography of recent classification and indexing
literature.
KNOWLEDGE ORGANIZATION should therefore be
available at every university and research library of every country, at every information center, at colleges and schools of library and information science, in the hands of everybody interested in the fields mentioned above and thus also at every
office for updating information on any topic related to the
problems of order in our information-flooded times.
KNOWLEDGE ORGANIZATION was founded in
1973 by an international group of scholars with a consulting
board of editors representing the worlds regions, the special
classification fields, and the subject areas involved. From
1974-1980 it was published by K.G. Saur Verlag, Mnchen.
Back issues of 1978-1992 are available from ERGON-Verlag,
too.
As of 1989, KNOWLEDGE ORGANIZATION has become the official organ of the INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR KNOWLEDGE ORGANIZATION (ISKO)
and is included for every ISKO-member, personal or institutional in the membership fee (US $ 55/US $ 110).
Rates: From 2008 on for 4 issues/ann. (including indexes)
129,00 (forwarding costs included). Membership rates see
above.
ERGON-Verlag GmbH, Keesburgstr. 11, D-97074 Wrzburg; Phone: +49 (931) 280084; FAX +49 (931) 282872;
E-mail: service@ergon-verlag.de; http://www.ergon-verlag.de

philosophy and science of science


science policy and science organization
mathematics, statistics and computer science
library and information science
archivistics and museology
journalism and communication science
industrial products and commodity science
terminology, lexicography and linguistics

Beginning in 1974, KNOWLEDGE ORGANIZATION


(formerly INTERNATIONAL CLASSIFICATION) has
been serving as a common platform for the discussion of both
theoretical background questions and practical application
problems in many areas of concern. In each issue experts from
many countries comment on questions of an adequate structuring and construction of ordering systems and on the problems of their use in opening the information contents of new
literature, of data collections and survey, of tabular works and
of other objects of scientific interest. Their contributions have
been concerned with

(1)

(2)

(3)
(4)
(5)

clarifying the theoretical foundations (general ordering


theory/science, theoretical bases of classification, data
analysis and reduction)
describing practical operations connected with indexing/classification, as well as applications of classification
systems and thesauri, manual and machine indexing
tracing the history of classification knowledge and
methodology
discussing questions of education and training in classification
concerning themselves with the problems of terminology in general and with respect to special fields.

The contents of this journal are indexed and abstracted in Referativnyi Zhurnal Informatika and in the following online databases:
Information Science Abstracts, INSPEC, Library and Information
Science Abstracts (LISA), Library Literature, PASCAL, Sociological Abstracts, and Web Science & Social Sciences Citation Index.