The core problem in Information Science (IS) is in my opinion information seeking and "information retrieval", (IR), which is aimed at helping users become informed by helping them identify documents, which are the "best textual means to some end" (Wilson, 1968). Other problems, such as the design of information systems and knowledge organization (e.g. by classification and indexing) should be seen as means to that end. However, IS has ignored some fundamental problems, which questions the possibility of having a profession and a discipline trying to solve the above mentioned problems. Much research in IS has been based on certain problematic views of knowledge, and searched for principles of knowledge organization, which are independent of claims of subject-knowledge. In this paper, we shall look at the problems of knowledge organization based on a view of knowledge as a historical developed product in which principles of organization is tied to domain-specific criteria. The article is organized as an argumentation for nine principles on the organization of knowledge: Principle # 1: Naive-realistic perception of knowledge structures is not possible in more advanced sciences. The deepest principles on the organization on knowledge rest upon principles developed in and by scientific disciplines. Principle # 2: Categorizations and classifications should unite related subjects and separate unrelated subjects. In naive realism, subject relationships are based on similarity. Two things or subjects are seen as related if they are "alike", that is if they have common properties (descriptive terms) ascribed. Principle # 3 For practical purposes, knowledge can be organized in different ways, and with different levels of ambition: Principle # 4: Any given categorization should reflect the purpose of that categorization. It is very important to teach the student to find out the lie of the land and apply ad hoc classifications, pragmatic classifications or scientific classifications when each kind of classification is most appropriate. Principle # 5: Concrete scientific categorizations and classifications can always be questioned. Principle # 6: The concept of "polyrepresentation" (cf. Ingwersen, 1994) is important. Principle # 7: To a certain degree different arts and sciences could be understood as different ways of organizing the same phenomena. Principle # 8: The nature of disciplines varies. Principle # 9: The quality of the knowledge production in many disciplines is in great trouble

Classaurus is a faceted hierarchic scheme of terms with vocabulary control features.

It is more than 30 years ago that the guidelines ISO 2788 and 5964 were developed for the design of thesauri, basically to meet the demands of bibliographic databases and libraries. The last revision of the standards dates around 20 years back. Information technology has changed the usage of thesauri, a development that has motivated many changes in BS 8723, the first successor of ISO 2788 and 5964. Not only has the world of thesauri and libraries matured. Ever since there have been defined a variety of structured vocabularies, thesauri being just one of them: ontologies, taxonomies, classification schemes, topic maps, just to name some of them. For these types of vocabularies there hardly exist rules for the construction of the vocabulary content comparable to those for thesauri. There are standards for the formal description of some vocabulary types at most, e.g. SKOS, Topic Maps, RDF. The guidelines in Parts 1 and 2 of BS 8723 and its predecessors are, unfortunately, not simply applicable on vocabularies other than thesauri. The degree to which this is reasonable has not been analysed. Thus, applications using structured vocabularies other than thesauri lack guidance for the construction of the vocabulary content. The developments in BS 8723, particularly those in the forthcoming Part 3, "Vocabularies other than thesauri", try to catch up that knowledge gap. However, these vocabulary types are treated in much less detail than thesauri. Part 3 seems rather a detour from thesauri than a standard for other vocabularies. BS 8723 will basically remain a thesaurus standard, particularly in terms of its rules for construction. The further development of BS 8723 as an ISO standard (ISO 25964) is a chance to continue the transformation of a once thesaurus-only standard to a truly general knowledge organization standard. The most important reasons that encourage such strategy are: - While some of the rules from the thesaurus standard will have to be modified, a significant number of rules can be expected to apply directly to other types of structured vocabularies. So it makes sense to keep them in a single standard. - It is easier to develop rules for different structured vocabularies if being put in contrast to thesauri. The thesaurus standards are based on decades of extensive experience and include also knowledge about "what is relevant to cover". - It is highly useful to give general guidance in choosing the right type of structured vocabulary before the structured vocabularies are detailed. - Bringing together various disciplines avoids the reinvention of knowledge and strengthens "knowledge structuring" as a professional discipline. - A higher differentiation of knowledge structures / vocabularies can be expected resulting in more efficient and purpose-oriented development of vocabularies. The resulting and certainly greatest benefit from a true "multi-vocabulary" standard is the interest of industry and many other disciplines than library science. Thus, the relevance of the standard will be increased. Examples for potential application areas of a common standard are: - Skill catalogs in competence management - Visualizations of the organizational structure - The directory structures in computer file systems (particularly shared folders) - Categorizations (typology) of files in a Document Management System - Description of knowledge assets in knowledge management tools - Categorization systems (typology) of music or picture archives - Knowledge maps - Corporate Encyclopaedias - Vocabularies for search expansion in search engines - The navigation structure, labelling system and the metadata on web sites - The Table of content and / or the index of a book or complex document / It is more than 30 years ago that the guidelines ISO 2788 and 5964 were developed for the design of thesauri â basically to meet the demands of bibliographic databases and libraries. The last revision of the standards dates around 20 years back. Information technology has changed the usage of thesauri â a development that has motivated many changes in BS 8723, the first successor of ISO 2788 and 5964. Not only has the world of thesauri and libraries matured. Ever since there have been defined a variety of structured vocabularies, thesauri being just one of them: ontologies, taxonomies, classification schemes, topic maps â just to name some of them. For these types of vocabularies there hardly exist rules for the construction of the vocabulary content comparable to those for thesauri. There are standards for the formal description of some vocabulary types at most, e.g. SKOS, Topic Maps, RDF. The guidelines in Parts 1 and 2 of BS 8723 and its predecessors are, unfortunately, not simply applicable on vocabularies other than thesauri. The degree to which this is reasonable has not been analysed. Thus, applications using structured vocabularies other than thesauri lack guidance for the construction of the vocabulary content. The developments in BS 8723 â particularly those in the forthcoming Part 3, "Vocabularies other than thesauri" â try to catch up that knowledge gap. However, these vocabulary types are treated in much less detail than thesauri. Part 3 seems rather a detour from thesauri than a standard for other vocabularies. BS 8723 will basically remain a thesaurus standard, particularly in terms of its rules for construction. The further development of BS 8723 as an ISO standard (ISO 25964) is a chance to continue the transformation of a once thesaurus-only standard to a truly general knowledge organization standard. The most important reasons that encourage such strategy are: - While some of the rules from the thesaurus standard will have to be modified, a significant number of rules can be expected to apply directly to other types of structured vocabularies. So it makes sense to keep them in a single standard. - It is easier to develop rules for different structured vocabularies if being put in contrast to thesauri. The thesaurus standards are based on decades of extensive experience and include also knowledge about "what is relevant to cover". - It is highly useful to give general guidance in choosing the right type of structured vocabulary before the structured vocabularies are detailed. - Bringing together various disciplines avoids the reinvention of knowledge and strengthens "knowledge structuring" as a professional discipline. - A higher differentiation of knowledge structures / vocabularies can be expected resulting in more efficient and purpose-oriented development of vocabularies. The resulting and certainly greatest benefit from a true "multi-vocabulary" standard is the interest of industry and many other disciplines than library science. Thus, the relevance of the standard will be increased. Examples for potential application areas of a common standard are: - Skill catalogs in competence management - Visualizations of the organizational structure - The directory structures in computer file systems (particularly shared folders) - Categorizations (typology) of files in a Document Management System - Description of knowledge assets in knowledge management tools - Categorization systems (typology) of music or picture archives - Knowledge maps - Corporate Encyclopaedias - Vocabularies for search expansion in search engines - The navigation structure, labelling system and the metadata on web sites - The Table of content and / or the index of a book or complex document

The purpose of this paper is to provide an answer to a critique put forward by Szostak against a paper written by the present author. The paper is based on a literature-based conceptual analysis based on Hjørland and Nissen Pedersen and Szostak. The main points in a core theory of classification are outlined and Szostakâ s criticism is examined and answered. The paper demonstrates theoretical differences between the views adduced by Hjørland and Nissen Pedersen on the one side and by Szostak on the other.

As a visual artist, I collect, organize, and re present and continually reflect on that process. The life and work of Swedish botanist Carl von Linné continues to be significant in understanding the cultural practices of classification and representation. Images gathered in the University of Uppsala, at Linné’s preserved home in Hammerby outside of Uppsala, Sweden and from Linné’s samples stored by the Royal Society in London continue to infuse my art work. It was Linné who developed the binomial system of classification which is the basis of modern scientific classification. It was Linné who strived for a systematic representation of the natural object. Information was not real or useful to science unless it took a quantified form. Naming. Measuring. Representing. I am drawn to the similarities and differences of artistic and scientific practice. My focus lies in the ironies of that comparison. Currently I work with the natural object as it is represented in scientific collections and public display. I am interested in the meaning of the representation. My presentation to the ASSI&T Workshop would take the form of a visual presentation of the natural object, beginning in the 18th century with Linné, followed by subsequent developments in the representation of nature. Examples of my art work would be used to consider that history.

In her paper Beghtol (2003) outlines how scholarly activities and research leads to classification systems which subsequently are disseminated in publications which are classified in information retrieval systems, retrieved by the users and again used in scholarly activities and so on. We think this model is correct and that its point is important. What we are reacting to is the fact that Beghtol describes the classifications developed by scholars as â naïveâ while she describes the classifications developed by librarians and information scientists as â professionalâ . We fear that this unfortunate terminology is rooted in deeply anchored misjudgments about the relationships between scientific and scholarly classification on the one side and LIS classifications on the other. Only a correction of this misjudgment may give us in the field of knowledge organization a chance to do a job that is not totally disrespected and disregarded by the rest of the intellectual world.

I had the honor of attending the first NASKO conference held at the University of Toronto, June 14th and 15th 2007. This set holds images from the presentations and some of the informal moments of my trip. I have done my best to be thorough with metadata but I welcome the addition of tags or comments from other conference attendees. Please, join in the perfomative and informative experience of helping me classify my collection of images. Our collection.

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.

This thesis deals with the socio-religious role of the Muhammadiyah movement from 1912 to 1990. The study analyzes the fundamental ideology of the movement, and its implementation in the religious and social life of the Indonesians. Its religious outlook illustrates its character as a purifying movement which is devoted to performing religious practice ('ibadah) based on the authentic sources. At the same time it also provides ideas which enable the movement to encourage moral reform and yet which are adaptable to contemporary conditions. The ideas manifest themselves in the form of various religious activities of dakwah (propagation), and a great number of educational institutions and social endeavors. The importance of the Muhammadiyah movement lies in its significant contribution in bringing about profound changes in the religious, social, and educational aspects of the Indonesian Muslim's life.

Thesis (M.A.) -- University of Adelaide. / Typewritten.