In information science, the creation of classification schemes has been more commonly described in the mode of scientific discovery, as opposed to artifact design. From the literary warrant of Hulme to the terminological warrant of the Classification Research Group (CRG), to Hjorlandâ s domain analysis, the classificationist seems like one who documents and compiles, and not one who actively shapes design. Outside of information science, however, classification is used as an active argument to structure interpretations (in linguistics and philosophy) and as a means of coordinating and imposing order on work practices (in studies of information systems). In this paper, I suggest that classification researchers should investigate a wider variety of design possibilities, in which the purpose of a classification is not assumed to be a retrieval tool in the traditional manner. A consequence of an expanded design space is that standard classification manuals and guides become insufficient support for the design process; a new research area might be the facilitation of problem-setting aspects of classification design. One avenue of possible research involves the description of a design language, following the description of such by Lowgren and Stolterman (2004) and Donald Schon (1983). A design language, which might be operationalized as a set of product qualities, might provide a framework by which designers can better understand, evaluate, and create classifications.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:arizona.edu/oai:arizona.openrepository.com:10150/105447 |
| Date | January 2007 |
| Creators | Feinberg, Melanie |
| Contributors | Tennis, Joseph T. |
| Publisher | dLIST |
| Source Sets | University of Arizona |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Conference Paper |
Page generated in 0.0019 seconds