This is the powerpoint presentation. Another entry contains the paper version. / Considers the concept of "bias" in relation to views concerning objectivity and neutrality in Knowledge Organization.

In this article, problems users are having searching for known works in current online public access catalogs (OPACs) are summarized. A better understanding of AACR2R/MARC 21 authority, bibliographic, and holdings records would allow us to implement the approaches outlined in the IFLA Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records to enhance, or â FRBRize,â our current OPACs using existing records. The presence of work and expression identifiers in bibliographic and authority records is analyzed. Recommendations are made concerning better indexing and display of works and expressions/manifestations. Questions are raised about the appropriateness for the creation of true catalogs of clientserver technology that deliver records over the Internet.

The paper suggests extensions to SKOS Core to make explicit where concepts in a knowledge organization system have changed from one version of the system to another.

This paper discusses and analyzes the conceptual basis for classification work in the 21st century; it provides an account of classification that lays out the boundaries within which classification operate. The methodological and practical effects of the boundaries are discussed. The main point of the paper is to demonstrate that classifications are bound by particular contexts and conceptual frameworks.

This presentation will address the difficult task of representing complex concepts in a text in a way that reflects their contextual meaning. The preservation of context enables the disambiguation of a termiÌ s possible multiple senses, and also shows how the term is being used. In developing these ideas we revisit an indexing system called PRECIS, which was developed by Derek Austin in the early 1970s for subject indexing for the British National Bibliography, and subsequently developed by him with the assistance of Mary Dykstra into a adaptable method of linking both the semantics and syntax of indexing terms.

Herb Simon, the pioneer cognitive scientist, computer scientist, economist, and Nobel prize winner, wrote that design is the core of all professional activity (Simon, 1996). The natural sciences are concerned with how things are; the science of design is concerned with how things ought to be â with devising artifacts to attain goalsâ (Schon, 1990, p. 110). In other words, according to Simon, what professionals do is to â transform an existing state of affairs, a problem, into a preferred state, a solution â (Schon, p. 111). A key area of professional design in library and information science is the creation of systems for the organization of knowledge. The purpose of this research project is to examine the design process in knowledge organization using design theory which originated in other fields. There is a rich literature based on research in the fields of architecture, engineering, software design, clinical psychology, city planning, and other professions. I used the themes originating in this literature to explore design in LIS. In LIS, design work related to knowledge organization is carried out simultaneously at multiple levels in the devising of national standards for design such as the NISO Guidelines for the Construction, Format, and Management of Monolingual Thesauri, in the maintenance of major vocabularies such as the Library of Congressâ s Thesaurus for Graphic Materials, in the design of vocabularies intended to be diffused widely such as the Art & Architecture Thesaurus, and at the local level in the creation of descriptors and classification systems for individual collections of materials. The specific focus of this research project is design of vocabularies â in which I include subject headings, descriptors, keywords, captions, and classification systems -- for local collections of images.

Warrant, in classification, is encompassed in the Oxford English DictionaryiÌ s definition: "justifying reason or ground for an action, belief, or feeling." Classifications may be deemed good or bad on the basis of any number of characteristics, but the justification for their choice and order of classes or concepts is one of the most fundamental. This paper will introduce the notion of warrant used by Francis Bacon in his classification of knowledge, discuss its uniqueness within the panoply of classificatory history, and suggest that Bacon still has a radical idea to suggest to todayiÌ s classificationists.

The now taken-for-granted notion that data lead to information, which leads to knowledge, which in turn leads to wisdom was first specified in detail by R. L. Ackoff in 1988. The Data-Information-Knowledge-Wisdom hierarchy is based on filtration, reduction, and transformation. Besides being causal and hierarchical, the scheme is pyramidal, in that data are plentiful while wisdom is almost nonexistent. Ackoffâ s formula linking these terms together this way permits us to ask what the opposite of knowledge is and whether analogous principles of hierarchy, process, and pyramiding apply to it. The inversion of the Data-Information-Knowledge-Wisdom hierarchy produces a series of opposing terms (including misinformation, error, ignorance, and stupidity) but not exactly a chain or a pyramid. Examining the connections between these phenomena contributes to our understanding of the contours and limits of knowledge.

Teaching classification extends beyond teaching any one classification system, but involves a variety of thinking approaches to the possibilities of how to organize. Teaching classification in the 21st century involves recognizing that the traditional parking of materials co-exists with more flexible ways of classifying new formats, objects, digital files, etc. Involving students in the logical and systematic underpinnings of various classification systems along with the technological advancements that offer new ways to organize and sort launches the thinking process. Classroom simulations serve to introduce students to a range of classification problems, including organization of objects and images along with discussions of user perspectives and anticipation of future use of the item. The group simulations and discussions surface new issues while presenting basic concepts through active participation.

This paper uses Paul Ricoeur's distinction between language and discourse to help define a North American research agenda in knowledge organization. Ricoeur's concept of discourse as a set of utterances, defined within multiple disciplines and domains, and reducible, not to the word but to the sentence, provides three useful tools for defining our research. First, it enables us to recognize the important contribution of numerous studies that focus on acts of organization, rather than on standards or tools of organization. Second, it gives us a harmonious paradigm that helps us reconcile the competing demands of interoperability, based on widely-used tools and techniques of library science, and domain integrity, based on user warrant and an understanding of local context. Finally, it resonates with the current economic, political and social climate in which our information systems work, particularly the competing calls for protectionism and globalization.