A synthetic approach to the classification of music. Review article
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2020.ene.05Palabras clave:
Post-coordination, Pre-coordination, Subject strings, Classification, Music, Basic concepts, Social diversity, Grammar, Sentences, User interface, Nature of a work, Recall, Precision, Search, Information retrieval, Knowledge organization, Review article.Resumen
This paper first reviews the advantages and disadvantages associated with both pre-coordination and post-coordination in classification. It then argues that we can have the advantages of both if we couple a post-coordinated (synthetic) approach to classification with a user interface that privileges the word order in search queries. Several other advantages of such an approach to classification and search are reviewed. It better captures the nature of a work (or object), addresses important issues with respect to social diversity, and facilitates user queries. It produces subject strings that resemble sentence fragments; this serves to clarify the meaning of terms within the subject string, and makes subject strings more comprehensible since humans typically think in sentences. These various benefits are then illustrated in the classification of works of music. It is shown that many important characteristics of works of music are best handled by such a system. These are generally poorly addressed, or not addressed at all, by existing approaches to the classification of music.
Referencias
Austin, Derek W. (1974). Precis: a manual of concept analysis and subject indexing. London: Council of the British National Bibliography. ISBN: 0900220422
Bliss Bibliographic Association (2017). The Bliss Bibliographic Classification: using the scheme. http://www.blissclassification.org.uk/bcclass.shtml
Börner, Katy (2006). “Semantic association networks: Using semantic web technology to improve scholarly knowledge and expertise management”. In: V. Geroimenko & C. Chen (eds.), Visualizing the semantic web: XML-based internet and information visualization (pp. 183-198). London: Springer. ISBN: 978 1 4471 3737 5
Cer, Daniel; Yang, Yinfei; Kong, Sheng-yi; Hua, Nan; Limtiaco, Nicole; St. John, Rhomni; Constant, Noah; Guajardo-Céspedes, Mario; Yuan, Steve; Tar, Chris; Sung, Yun-Hsuan; Strope, Brian; Kurzweil, Ray (2018). Universal sentence encoder, arXiv:1803.11175v2 [cs.CL] 12 Apr 2018. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1803.11175.pdf
Firth, John R. (1957). Papers in linguistics 1934-1951. London: Oxford University Press. ISBN: 978 0 197135488
Foskett, Antony-Charles (1996). The subject approach to information. London: Library Association. ISBN: 978 1 856040488
Furner, Jonathan (2010). “Philosophy and information studies”. Annual review of information science and technology, v. 44, n. 1, pp. 161-200. https://doi.org/10.1002/aris.2010.1440440111
Furner, Jonathan (2014). “Information without information studies”. In: F. Ibekwe-SanJuan & T. M. Dousa (eds.), Theories of information, communication and knowledge: A multidisciplinary approach (pp. 143-179). New York: Springer. ISBN: 978 94 007 6973 1
Gnoli, Claudio (2008). “Ten long-term research questions in knowledge organization”. Knowledge organization, v. 35, n. 2-3, pp. 137-149. https://doi.org/10.5771/0943-7444-2008-2-3-137
Gnoli, Claudio (2016). “Classifying phenomena. Part 1: Dimensions”. Knowledge organization, v. 43, n. 6, pp. 403-415. https://doi.org/10.5771/0943-7444-2016-6-403
Gnoli, Claudio (2017a). “Classifying phenomena. Part 2: Types and levels”. Knowledge organization, v. 44, n. 1, pp. 37-54. https://doi.org/10.5771/0943-7444-2017-1-37
Gnoli, Claudio (2017b). “Classifying phenomena. Part 3: Facets”. In: Dimensions of knowledge: facets for knowledge organization, Richard Smiraglia and Hur-Li Lee (eds.). Würzburg: Ergon, pp. 55-67. ISBN: 978 3 956502736
Gnoli, Claudio (2018). “Classifying phenomena. Part 4: Themes and rhemes”. Knowledge organization, v. 45, n. 1, pp. 43-53. https://doi.org/10.5771/0943-7444-2018-1-43
Gorman, Jamie C.; Cooke, Nancy J.; Salas, Eduardo; Keyton, Joann; Beck, Stephenson J. (2010). “Perspectives: Examining communication as macrocognition in STS”. Human factors, v. 52, n. 2, pp. 335-339. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720810371338
Hjørland, Birger (2012). “Is classification necessary after Google?”. Journal of documentation, v. 68, n. 3, pp. 299-317. https://doi.org/10.1108/00220411211225557
Hjørland, Birger (2014). “Information science and its core concepts: Levels of disagreement”. In: F. Ibekwe-SanJuan & T. M. Dousa (eds.). Theories of information, communication and knowledge: A multidisciplinary approach (pp. 205-235). New York: Springer. ISBN: 978 94 007 6973 1
Integrative Levels Classification. ISKO. http://www.iskoi.org/ilc
Jacob, Elin K. (2004). “Classification and categorization: A difference that makes a difference”. Library trends, v. 52, n. 3, pp. 515-540. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Classification-and-Categorization%3A-A-Difference-a-Jacob/544f3fbb77f9d2b414daa69e26de0960facc1438
Leon manifesto (2007). http://www.iskoi.org/ilc/leon.php
Lyttle, Melanie A.; Walsh, Shawn D. (2018). “Leaving dewey for BISAC”. Public libraries online, Nov. 6. http://publiclibrariesonline.org/2018/11/leaving-dewey-for-bisac
Marty, Paul F. (2014). “Digital convergence and the information profession in cultural heritage organizations: Reconciling internal and external demands”. Library trends, v. 62, n. 3, pp. 613-627. https://doi.org/10.1353/lib.2014.0007
Olson, Hope A. (2007). “How we construct subjects: A feminist analysis”. Library trends, v. 56, n. 2, pp. 509-541. https://doi.org/10.1353/lib.2008.0007
Ranganathan, Shiyali R. (1962). Elements of library classification. Bombay: Asia Publishing House.
Repko, Allen; Szostak, Rick (2020). Interdisciplinary research: Process and theory, 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. ISSN: 978 1 412988773
Šauperl, Alenka (2009). “Precoordination or not?: A new view of the old question”. Journal of documentation, v. 65, n. 5, pp. 817-833. https://doi.org/10.1108/00220410910983128
Smiraglia, Richard P. (2001). The nature of “a work”: Implications for the organization of knowledge. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press. ISBN: 978 0 810840379
Svenonius, Elaine (1993). “Pre-coordination or not? Subject indexing in the 90s: principles and practices”. In: Holley, R. P.; McGarry, D.; Duncan, D.; Svenonius, E. (eds.). IFLA Satellite Meeting. Lisbon, 17-18 August. Ubcim Publications, v. 15. SAUR. ISBN: 3 598 11251 3
Svenonius, Elaine (2004). “The epistemological foundations of knowledge representations”. Library trends, v. 52, n. 3, pp. 571-587.
https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/1691/Svenonius571587.pdf
Szostak, Rick (2003). A schema for unifying human science: Interdisciplinary perspectives on culture, Selinsgrove PA: Susquehanna University Press. ISBN: 978 1 575910604
Szostak, Rick (2004). Classifying science: Phenomena, data, theory, method, practice, Dordrecht: Springer. ISBN: 978 1 4020 3095 6
Szostak, Rick (2011). “Complex concepts into basic concepts”. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, v. 62, n. 11, pp. 2247-2265. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21635
Szostak, Rick (2012). “Classifying relationships”. Knowledge organization, v. 39, n. 3, pp. 165-178.
https://www.nomos-elibrary.de/10.5771/0943-7444-2012-3-165.pdf
Szostak, Rick (2017). “Facet analysis without facet indicators”. In: Smiraglia, Richard; Lee, Hur-li (eds.). Dimensions of knowledge: Facets for knowledge organization. Wurzburg: Ergon, pp. 69-86. ISBN: 978 3 956502736
Szostak, Rick (2019). Basic Concepts Classification. ISKO Encyclopedia of knowledge organization. https://www.isko.org/cyclo/bcc
Szostak, Rick; Gnoli, Claudio; López-Huertas, María (2016). Interdisciplinary knowledge organization. Berlin: Springer. ISBN: 978 3 319 30148 8
United Nations Standard Products and Services Code (Unspsc) (n.d.). https://www.unspsc.org
Descargas
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Condiciones de difusión de los artículos una vez son publicados
Los autores pueden publicitar sus artículos de acuerdo con estos términos:
Pasadas 2 semanas desde la publicación (tiempo necesario para que Google indexe la versión de la web de la revista), los autores pueden ofrecer en sus webs (personales o institucionales) o en cualquier repositorio de acceso abierto (OA) una copia del trabajo publicado por EPI. Deberán respetarse sin embargo, las siguientes condiciones:
- Solo deberá hacerse pública la versión editorial. Rogamos que no se publiquen preprints, postprints o pruebas de imprenta.
- Junto con esa copia ha de incluirse una mención específica de la publicación en la que ha aparecido el texto, añadiendo además un enlace clicable a la URL: http://www.profesionaldelainformacion.com
La revista Profesional de la información ofrece los artículos en acceso abierto con una licencia Creative Commons BY .