Advantages of Social Cataloging

November 11, 2007 at 10:15 pm | In Social Cataloging, Web 2.0, Web2.0, tag clouds, tagging, technology | 2 Comments
Tags: , , , , , , ,

BookshelfAdvantages of Social Cataloging

Social bookmarking has added a great deal to how information users share their online resources, however LibraryThing has taken social bookmarking and networking to an entirely new level. LibraryThing at http://www.librarything.com/ is a social network of bibliophiles. It is a Web site to help people catalog their own books, as well as connects people with the same books, and comes up with suggestions for what to read next. Its primary feature is the automatic cataloging of books by importing data from booksellers and libraries through Z39.50 (Z39.50 is a client server protocol for searching and retrieving information from remote computer databases).

BooksUsers (informally known as thingamabrarians) can catalog personal collections, keep reading lists, and meet other users who have the same books. While it is possible to keep a library catalog private, most people choose to make their catalogs public, which makes it possible to find others with similar tastes. Thingamabrarians can browse the entire database by searching titles, authors, or tags generated by users as they enter books into their libraries.

Users of LibraryThing can import information from over 80 libraries including Library of Congressthe Library of Congress, and the Canadian National Catalogue. Once the correct book and edition has been located, a simple click adds it to their own catalog. They can also add books from another member’s catalog or by searching on LibraryThing itself. Assuming the book is found (and most will be), each time a user adds a book, LibraryThing automatically posts an image of its front cover, its date of publication, its ISBN (International Standard Book Number), a list of other editions. It may even suggest where a person can buy new copies online. If the user desires, they can add other information, including tags, a star rating, a Dewey decimal number, the date they acquired the book, the day they started reading, and the date they finished reading it. Users can add comments to the database and even post reviews. If the correct book or edition is not available in the available databases, users can add it manually or edit the record later.

Although LibraryThing provides cataloging data from the Library of Congress, it encourages its users to tag the books included in their collective collections. clouds.gif LibraryThing, like many other folksonomy applications, incorporates a tag cloud into the “Social Information” page created for each book. The tag cloud enlarges the tags visually when they constitute a high percentage of use.

When a book is tagged, you can view when other users or books use that tag. “Members with your books” shows the 50 most similar libraries from other members. When viewing another member’s profile or library, the system shows how many (and which) books you share with that other member. If desired, you can leave a (public or private) comment on their profile. You can also add the member as a friend, to your private watch list, or as an interesting library.

The LibraryThing Web site does not use advertising, but receives referral fees from online bookstores that supply book cover images. Individual users can sign up for free and register up to 200 books. dollarsBeyond that limit and/or for commercial or group use, a subscription fee is charged. You can browse for free can post up to 200 books free of charge. You can also access your virtual library from my cell phone while standing in a bookshop by pointing your cell phone’s browser to <http://www.librarything.com/m>. Beyond that, you have to pay either $10 for a yearly membership or $25 for a lifetime account.

Danbury Public Library, Danbury, Connecticut was the first library to add the LibraryThing widgets to its catalog. The LibraryThing data is integrated almost seamlessly into the record display. Tags and the tag browsers bring the cataloging efforts of LibraryThing’s thousands of users into the local OPAC (online public access catalog). Users merely click on a tag associated with a book and the tag browser opens and provides a list of all the other books in the library with that same tag. The tag browser also provides a tag search engine, which has created an entirely new way to navigate our catalog.

Follow the link to a biography of Benjamin Franklin in the Danbury LibraryBen Franklin <http://cat.danburylibrary.org/record=1263103>. Notice the LibraryThing tag cloud at the end of the record. It provides more links to related OPAC resources than the traditional Library of Congress or Sears Subject Headings.

Using LibraryThing.com, readers, authors, librarians, and researchers can now multiply their resources by sharing libraries and network with those with similar interests and information needs.

Advantages and Challenges of Tagging and Folksonomy

October 9, 2007 at 6:05 pm | In Web 2.0, educational technology, folksonomy, tag clouds, tagging | Leave a Comment
Tags: , , ,

ADVANTAGES OF TAGGING AND FOLKSONOMY

question.jpgTagging takes away the decision-making process of choosing the right category and risk the possibility of ending in a poorly defined sub-category.  Tagging allows you to include associated concepts without wondering whether you have categorized the item in the correct folder or not. Applying structured taxonomies is frustrating because some items do not fit comfortably into any category. This lack of fit could happen if the concept or product is so new that no terms describing the topic have been added to the taxonomy yet. In comparison, folksonomies are nimble and flexible. They can change quickly. You can add new terms at will, and there is no need to jump through several hoops to get new terms added or approved.  

            By using folksonomies, you can discover new and more current digital content duetime.jpg to its ability to be updated immediately.  Folksonomies can also be organized so you can explore the “long tail interests” – the less frequently used keywords that people choose that can help users focus their searches and applications.

      Tag clouds and folksonomies automatically help create communities as users with similar interests gravitate toward similar, searchable word tags. Tagged content increases the amount of usable retrievals by providing more than one place you can look for information on the same topic.

clouds.gifBest of all, tag clouds and folksonomy are mobile and can be accessed from anywhere with an Internet connection. Educators, students, and parents can continue their research regardless of their location.

            Folksonomies lend themselves to exploration as well as being self-moderating and inclusive. They are less expensive to maintain than a traditional taxonomy and everyone can contribute to its development.

CHALLENGES WITH TAGGING AND FOLKSONOMY

            While the advantages of using tagging, tag clouds, and folksonomy far out-weigh the disadvantages, it is important to be aware of some common problems typical of using these Web 2.0 tools. One of the most common problems is the misspelling of tags within the tag cosmos. The result is that it leaves orphaned content that has little benefit to the group at large.

reading_question.jpgAnother issue is deciding what the content being tagged is actually about. Everyone has different perceptions of what she is reading. Individual tags may tend to be disjointed, irrelevant, and often very messy. They lack precision and there is no ability to control synonyms or related terms. Tag clouds and folksonomies contain many variants such as plural, singular, spelling errors, and typos. Different social software tools take different approaches to tags composed of multiple words resulting in even more variations.

Folksonomies lack hierarchy. The flat-system folksonomies lack parent-child relationships, categories, and subcategories. This lack of hierarchy can directly influence searching and search results. Without hierarchy or synonym control, a search of a specific term will only yield results on that term and not provide the full body of related terms that might be relevant to the user’s information needs and goals. Folksonomy does not include “See” and “See Also” guidelines that librarians are familiar with in traditional taxonomy cataloging.

Tags with more than one meaning and can lead the searcher into an undesired area. Personalized tags are clear to a handful of people, but are not universally understood. Some may argue that metadata systems already exist and a less structured system is not necessary.

            As educators, we need to be aware of the concerns of using some Web 2.0 tools

21st-century.jpgwith our students. Safety is one of the biggest concerns, but with good firewall protection, acceptable use policies, and preliminary training on using these tools, students would most likely not encounter inappropriate situations. If certain information is intended to be private, precautions should be taken to include only certain users a tag cloud, folksonomy, or social network.

Blog at WordPress.com. | Theme: Pool by Borja Fernandez.
Entries and comments feeds.