Abstract

It is argued that because knowledge is abstract and every person has a unique perception of his environment and the properties and behaviour of its components, it follows that those people engaged in Knowledge Organization (and less directly Knowledge Representation) must base their work on physical records, which we may call carriers of information, or messages. The products based on analysis of these messages can then be considered as models of knowledge. Models are created in order to reduce complexity and to gain a clearer understanding of aspects of the world around us, but they must be continuously tested and revised in a working environment. The testing of the products of Knowledge Organization is often carried out by information scientists in their provision of information retrieval, whereas while the products of Knowledge Representation also rely on Knowledge Organization, they may be considered, to some extent, to be self-testing. It follows that much can be gained by a closer collaboration between those engaged in Knowledge Organization, Knowledge Representation and various other information professionals engaged in delivering information to end users.

Keywords: Knowledge organization, Representation, Knowledge models, Information retrieval, Knowledge organization systems

References

  1. Campbell, D. Grant. (2012, 4-5 July). Revisiting Farradane’s relational indexing in a consumer health context. In Proceedings of the ISKO(UK) Biennial Conference. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing.
  2. Davis, R., Shrobe, H. and Szolovits P. (1993). What is a KR? AI Magazine, 14(1), 17-33.
  3. Floridi, L. (2010). Information.a very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  4. Heylighen, F.(1993). Epistemology, introduction. Retrieved on March 8, 2012, from http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/EPISTEMI.html
  5. Lambe, P. (2012, 4-5 July). Knowledge organization systems as enablers to the conduct of science. In Proceedings of the ISKO(UK) Biennial Conference. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing.
  6. McGraw Hill (2003). Dictionary of scientific and technical terms. New York: McGraw Hill.
  7. Miller, F. J. (2012). I=0 (Information has no intrinsic meaning). Information Research, 8(1),
  8. Myers, G..E. and Myers, M.T. (1998). The dynamics of human communications. New York: McGraw Hill.
  9. Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge creating company. Oxford: OUP
  10. Ohly, P. (2012). Knowledge organization 2.0 – a communicative paradigm? Retrieved on March 6, 2012, from http://www.iskoi.org/doc/web/ohly.pdf
  11. Knowledge. (2012). Oxford English Dictionary. Retrieved on March 6, 2012 from www.oed.com
  12. Petras, V. (2012, 4-5 July). Knowledge organization systems and their consequences for information retrieval. In Proceedings of the ISKO(UK) Biennial Conference. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing.
  13. Fallibilism. (2012). Wikipedia. Retrieved on March 7, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallibilism

License

Copyright (c) 2012 The author(s). This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.

How to Cite

Gilchrist, A. (2012). On Knowledge Organization. Information World, 13(1), 249-256. https://doi.org/10.15612/BD.2012.177