1 / 18

“To confer, converse, and otherwise hobnob with my brother wizards”: SLIC, SLAINTE and Web 2.0

“To confer, converse, and otherwise hobnob with my brother wizards”: SLIC, SLAINTE and Web 2.0. Celia Jenkins & Gillian Hanlon, SLIC. Why Web 2.0?. Improving SLAINTE. Focusing on needs of community. - Different ways of delivering content

gunda
Download Presentation

“To confer, converse, and otherwise hobnob with my brother wizards”: SLIC, SLAINTE and Web 2.0

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. “To confer, converse, and otherwise hobnob with my brother wizards”: SLIC, SLAINTE and Web 2.0 Celia Jenkins & Gillian Hanlon, SLIC

  2. Why Web 2.0? • Improving SLAINTE. Focusing on needs of community. - Different ways of delivering content - Encourages communication, participation & collaboration - Enhances our resources

  3. Tagging: Key features • User generated keywords • No controlled vocabulary • Non-hierarchical • Folksonomy • No limit to number of tags • Supporting fields

  4. The great tagging debate: part I • Enables “pseudo-faceted classification”(Speller, 2007) • Creates a bottom-up consensus view(Shirky, 2005) • Adaptable to changing vocabularies (Mathes, 2004) • Facilitates serendipitous browsing (Mathes, 2004) • Combination approach(Pattern, 2007) • Evidence of tag consensus being reached (Golder & Huberman, 2005)

  5. The great tagging debate: part II • Synonyms and homonyms(Mathes, 2004) • Ambiguity of uncontrolled vocabulary(Mathes, 2004) • Specificity and the level of expertise(Golder & Huberman, 2005) • Longevity of tags (Smith, 2005) • Spaces and multiple words(Mathes, 2004) • Personal versus social (Mathes, 2004)

  6. Tag chaos

  7. The source

  8. Tagging: flickr libraries group

  9. Tagging: Library of Congress approach • Flickr pilot commenced Jun 2007 – live Jan 2008 • Two LoC photo collections added • Dublin Core records included • Tags applied by users – except “Library of Congress” tag • LoC flickr record

  10. A delicate balance • Scalability - high cost of applying LoC approach • Cognitive issues - unlikely that users will tag to standards • Perception shift – not tagging versus cataloguing

  11. Scottish libraries tag guidelines

  12. The finished product: flickr

  13. The finished product: delicious

  14. Future developments • Continuous development of tagging guidelines • Building on existing content • Work in progress: pod/webcasting, Facebook, live chat and surveys • Overcoming legal barriers • Integration with SLAINTE

  15. Contact details • References on del.icio.us • Presentation on slideshare • All available through pageflakes: http://www.pageflakes.com/scottishlibraries • email: Celia Jenkins slic4@slainte.org.uk Gillian Hanlon slic1@slainte.org.uk

More Related