Qualitative analyses were used to launch a preliminary exploration of the dominant knowledge organization (KO) trends in the pre- and post-web eras. Data for this study was assembled by searching the Library, Information Science, and Technology Abstracts database for articles that have used the term `knowledge organization' or `information organization' in their titles, abstracts, or descriptors. Taken as a whole, these preliminary results suggest that the content of the KO literature has shifted since the advent of the web. Although classic KO principles remain prominent throughout both eras, the presence of new content areas, such as metadata, denotes a shift in KO trends. In the pre-web era, the literature was related in large part to indexing and abstracting. In contrast, cataloging and classification issues dominate the landscape in the post-web era. The findings from this paper will be of particular use to those interested in learning about upcoming trends in the KO literature.
University of British Columbia Libraries, Library, Information Science and Technology Abstracts (LISTA) (2006 ). Available at: http://toby.library.ubc.ca/resources/infopage.cfm?id=1035 (accessed 30 October 2006).
5.
D.T. Hawkins , S.E. Larson and B.Q. Caton, Information science abstracts: tracking the literature of information science. Part 2: A new taxonomy for information science, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology54(8) (2003) 771-81.
6.
Wikipedia, Mosaic (Web Browser) (2006). Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosaic_%28web_browser%29 (accessed 10 October 2006).
7.
K. Järvelin and P. Vakkari, Content analysis of research articles in library and information science, Library and Information Science Research12(4) (1990) 395-421.
8.
K. Charmaz, Grounded theory: objectivist and constructivist methods. In: N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln (eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research, 2nd Edition (Sage, Thousand Oaks, 2000) 509-35.
9.
A. Kenning and J. Jonsson, Aggregating distributed digital collections in the Mountain West Digital Library with the CONTENTdm multi-site server , Library Hi Tech23(2) (2005) 220-32.
10.
M. Cilia , C. Bornhövd and A. Buchmann, Event handling for the universal enterprise , Information Technology and Management6(1) (2005) 123-48.
11.
M.L. Mackenzie , The personal organization of electronic mail messages in a business environment: an exploratory study, Library and Information Science Research22(4) (2000) 405-26.
12.
N. Swartz , E-mails waste businesses' archive space, Information Management Journal38(6) (2004) 11.
13.
M. Broadbent . and H. Lofgren, Information delivery: identifying priorities, performance, and value, Information Processing and Management29(6) ( 1993) 683-701.
14.
R. Medina and J. Fenner, Controlling your documents, Information Management Journal39(1) (2005) 20-22.
15.
M. Dillon and A.S. Gray, FASIT: a fully automatic syntactically based indexing system, Journal of the American Society for Information Science34(2) (1983) 99-108.
16.
J.E. Rush , R. Salvador, and A. Zamora, Automatic abstracting and indexing, II: production of indicative abstracts by application of contextual inference and syntactic coherence criteria, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 22(4) (1971) 260-74.
17.
L.S. Maruyama , Format recognition: a report of a project at the Library of Congress, Journal of the American Society for Information Science22(4) (1971) 283-7.
18.
S. Artandi , Machine indexing: linguistic and semiotic implications , Journal of the American Society for Information Science27(4) ( 1976) 235-9.
19.
L.P. Jones , E.W. Gassie Jr and S. Radhakrishnan, INDEX: the statistical basis for an automatic conceptual phrase-indexing system, Journal of the American Society for Information Science41(2) (1990) 87-97.
20.
L.F. Rau , Knowledge organization and access in a conceptual information system, Information Processing and Management23(4) ( 1987) 269-84.
21.
J. Allan , Detection as multi-topic tracking, Information Retrieval5(2/3) (2002) 139-57.
22.
A. Finn and N. Kushmerick, Learning to classify documents according to genre, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology57(11) (2006) 1506-18.
23.
S.M. Humphrey , W.J. Rogers, H. Kilicoglu, D. Demner-Fushman and T.C. Rindflesch, Word sense disambiguation by selecting the best semantic type based on journal descriptor indexing: preliminary experiment, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology57(1) (2006) 96-113.
24.
J.W. Schneider and N. Borlund, Introduction to bibliometrics for construction and maintenance of thesauri: methodical considerations, Journal of Documentation60(5) (2004) 524-49.
25.
J. Wang, Automatic thesaurus development: term extraction from title metadata , Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology57(7) (2006) 907-20.
26.
J. Evans , S. McKemmish and K. Bhoday, Create once, use many times: the clever use of recordkeeping metadata for multiple archival purposes, Archival Science5(1) (2005) 17-42.
27.
S. Mitchell , Machine-assisted metadata generation and new resource discovery: software and services, First Monday11(8) (2006) 4.
28.
F. Ibekwe-sanJuan , Constructing and maintaining knowledge organization tools: a symbolic approach, Journal of Documentation62(2) (2006) 229-50.
29.
A. Leuski and J. Allan, Strategy-based interactive cluster visualization for information retrieval, International Journal on Digital Libraries3(2) (2000) 170-84.
30.
F.A. Hanson , From classification to indexing: how automation transforms the way we think, Social Epistemology18(4) (2004) 333-56.
31.
L. Zhou and D. Zhang, NLPIR: a theoretical framework for applying natural language processing to information retrieval, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology54(2) (2003) 115-23.
32.
D.L. Bosseau and S.K. Martin, The formerly virtually neutral library , Journal of Academic Librarianship21(2) (1995) 121-2.
33.
P. Ingwersen , The role of libraries and librarians in organising digital information, Libri: International Journal of Libraries and Information Services49(1) (1999) 11-15.
34.
F. Rowland and E.F. Duranceau, The need for information organizations and information professionals in the internet era, Serials Review21(1) (1995) 84-5.
35.
S. Downer, S. Medina, B. Nicol and A. Trehub, Alabama Mosaic: sharing Alabama history online, Library Hi Tech23(2) (2005) 233-51.
36.
L. Cantara, Encoding controlled vocabularies for the semantic web using SKOS core , OCLC Systems and Services22(2) (2006) 111-14.
37.
G. Hodge , Metadata for electronic information resources: from variety to interoperability, Information Services and Use25(1) ( 2005) 35-45.
38.
G. Hodge , C. Templeton and R. Allen, A metadata element set for project documentation , Science and Technology Libraries25(4) (2005) 5-23.
39.
L.C. Howarth , Metadata and bibliographic control: soul-mates or two solitudes? Cataloging and Classification Quarterly40(3/4) (2005) 37-56.
40.
D.M. Mackay and S. Hardy, Learning and teaching resource discovery in the health and life sciences - partnership and interoperability , Health Information and Libraries Journal22(Suppl.2) (2005) 70-74.
41.
R. Seth, A.R.D. Prasad and D.P. Madalli, Issues in metadata crosswalks: a case study of qualified Dublin Core and Onix , SRELS Journal of Information Management42(4) (2005) 523-32.
42.
S.L. Shreeves , J. Riley and L. Milewicz, Moving towards shareable metadata , First Monday11(8) (2006) 6.
43.
L. Wykoff , L. Mercier, T. Bond and A. Cornish, The Columbia River Basin ethnic history archive: a tristate online history database and learning center, Library Hi Tech23(2) (2005) 252-64.
44.
C. Hodgson and J. Walker, NISO metasearch initiative issues first set of recommendations, Against the Grain18(3) (2006) 74-6.
45.
K.P. Jones , The environment of classification: the concept of mutual exclusivity, Journal of the American Society for Information Science24(2) (1973) 157-63.
46.
C.T. Yu , The stability of two common matching functions in classification with respect to a proposed measure, Journal of the American Society for Information Science27(4) (1976) 248-55.
47.
S.D. Hall-Ellis , Cataloging electronic resources and metadata: employers' expectations as reflected in American libraries and AutoCAT, 2000-2005 , Journal of Education for Library and Information Science47(1) ( 2006) 38-51.
48.
B.L. Caraway , Library of Congress (LC), Serials Librarian49(1/2) (2005) 4-5.
49.
A. Copeland , S. Hamburger, J. Hamilton and K.J. Robinson, Cataloging and digitizing ephemera: one team's experience with Pennsylvania German broadsides and Fraktur, Library Resources and Technical Services50(3) (2006) 186-98.
50.
J. Hopkins and S.K. Roe , Cataloging news, Cataloging and Classification Quarterly40(1) (2005) 133-46.
51.
L. O'English , J.G. Matthews and E.B. Lindsay, Graphic novels in academic libraries: from Maus to Manga and beyond, Journal of Academic Librarianship32(2) ( 2006) 173-82.
52.
S.J. Miller , and W.C. Robertson, Integrating resources cataloging workshop , Serials Librarian48(1/2) ( 2005) 7-15.
53.
D. Reser and L. Hawkins, Defining an `access level' catalog record using MARC 21 and AACR2, Serials Review31(3) (2005) 218-19.
54.
K. Winzer , ALA/ALCTS Cataloging and Classification Section/Committee on Cataloging: description and access, Law Library Journal96(4) ( 2004) 861-2.
55.
D.N. Griffiths , The United Nations Classification Scheme: a critique and recommendations, Cataloging and Classification Quarterly40(1) (2005) 19-41.
56.
E. Currás , Vertical integration of sciences: an approach to a different view of knowledge organization, Journal of Information Science28(5) (2002) 397-406.
57.
A. Gilliland , N. Rouche, L. Lindberg and J. Evans, Towards a 21st century metadata infrastructure supporting the creation, preservation and use of trustworthy records: developing the InterPARES 2 metadata schema registry , Archival Science5(1) ( 2005) 43-78.
58.
L. Kuei-Kuei and W. Shiao-Jun, Using the patent co-citation approach to establish a new patent classification system, Information Processing and Management41(2) (2005) 313-30.
59.
A. Neelameghan and K.S. Raghavan, Seminal mnemonics in knowledge organization: ancient traditions and modern practices, Information Studies12(1) ( 2006) 5-26.
60.
B. Reeb and S. Gibbons, Students, librarians, and subject guides: improving a poor rate of return, Portal: Libraries and the Academy4(1) (2004) 123-30.
61.
N.J. Williamson , Classification in the millennium, Online and CD-Rom Review21(5) (1997) 298-301.
62.
M.J. Bates, Fundamental forms of information, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology57(8) (2006) 1033-45.
63.
F.M. Shipman III and R. Furuta, Guided paths through web-based collections: design, experiences, and adaptations, Journal of the American Society for Information Science51(3) (2000) 260-72.
64.
F. Meschini , Topic maps: how I learned to stop worrying and love metadata [in English] , Bollettino AIB45(1) (2005) 59-72.
65.
I. Schmidt and C. Muller, Planning a new type of literary edition: the Thomas Mann project, Markup Languages: Theory and Practice2(4) (2000) 353-65.
66.
P. van den Besselaar, The cognitive and the social structure of STS, Scientometrics51(2) (2001) 441-60.
67.
D. Alimohammadi , Meta-tags: still a matter of opinion, Electronic Library23(6) (2005) 625-31.
68.
M.A. Chopey , Planning and implementing a metadata-driven digital repository, Cataloging and Classification Quarterly40(3/4) (2005) 255-87.
69.
A. Coleman , Interdisciplinarity, interactivity, and interoperability for educating the digerati, Education for Information23(4) (2005) 233-43.
70.
R. Chandrakar , An approach to mapping CCF to Dublin Core, Electronic Library23(5) (2005) 577-90.
71.
J. Plodzien , E. Stemposz and A. Stasiecka, An approach to the quality and reusability of metadata specifications for e-learning objects, Online Information Review30(3) (2006) 238-251.
72.
F. Yu , Metadata schema used in OCLC sampled web pages , Journal of Educational Media and Library Sciences43(2) (2005) 129.
73.
V. Broughton , Faceted classification as a basis for knowledge organization in a digital environment: the Bliss bibliographic classification as a model for vocabulary management and the creation of multidimensional knowledge structures, New Review of Hypermedia and Multimedia7 (2001) 67-102.
74.
V. Broughton and H. Lane, Classification schemes revisited: applications to web indexing and searching, Journal of Internet Cataloging2(3/4) (2000) 143-55.
75.
V. Broughton , The need for a faceted classification as the basis of all methods of information retrieval, Aslib Proceedings58(1/2) (2006) 49-72.
76.
L.J. Haravu and A. Neelameghan, Text mining and data mining in knowledge organization and discovery: the making of knowledge-based products , Cataloging and Classification Quarterly37(1/2) (2003) 97-113.
77.
H. Frank , Cataloging the wide world of web: organizing the internet for distance learners, Journal of Business and Finance Librarianship7(2/3) (2002) 31-45.
78.
D. Vizine-Goetz , Classification schemes for internet resources revisited, Journal of Internet Cataloging5(4) (2002) 5-18.
79.
K.V. Fast and D.G. Campbell, The ontological perspectives of the semantic web and the metadata harvesting protocol: applications of metadata for improving web search, Canadian Journal of Information and Library Sciences26(4) (2001) 5-19.
80.
S. Sanchez-Alonso and E. Garcia-Barriocanal, Making use of upper ontologies to foster interoperability between SKOS concept schemes, Online Information Review30(3) (2006) 263-77.
81.
W.C. Blandão , The internet as a source of business information: an essay about the Brazilian internet reality [in English], Perspectivas Em Ciencia Da Informacao9(1) (2004) 88-99.
82.
A. Callery and D. Tracy-Proulx, Yahoo! cataloging the web, Journal of Internet Cataloging1(1) (1997) 57-64.
83.
A.S. Chaudhry and T.P. Jiun, Enhancing access to digital information resources on heritage: a case of development of a taxonomy at the integrated museum and archives system in Singapore, Journal of Documentation61(6) ( 2005) 751-76.
84.
H. Saeed and A.S. Chaudhry, Using Dewey Decimal Classification scheme (DDC) for building taxonomies for knowledge organization, Journal of Documentation58(5) (2002) 575-83.
85.
C. Shuttleworth , Indexes reviewed, Indexer25(1) (2006) 53-9.
86.
Z. Ercegovac , Multiple-version resources in digital libraries: towards user-centered displays, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology57(8) (2006) 1023-32.
87.
N. Meyyappan , S. Foo , and G.G. Chowdhury, Design and evaluation of a task-based digital library for the academic community, Journal of Documentation60(4) ( 2004) 449-75.
88.
J. Jeng, Usability assessment of academic digital libraries: effectiveness, efficiency, satisfaction, and learnability, Libri: International Journal of Libraries and Information Studies55(2/3) ( 2005) 96-121.
89.
A. Shiri, Digital library research: current developments and trends, Library Review52(5/6) (2003) 198-202.
90.
United States GovernmentPrinting Office, The report on the meeting of experts on digital preservation: metadata specifications, Microform and Imaging Review34(2) (2005) 74.
91.
A. Shiri and K. Molberg, Interfaces to knowledge organization systems in Canadian digital library collections , Online Information Review29(6) (2005) 604-20.
92.
L. Cantara, METS: the metadata encoding and transmission standard, Cataloging and Classification Quarterly40(3/4) (2005) 237-53.
93.
A. Chapman, Collection descriptions state of play. Library and Information Update4(4) (2005) 35-7.
94.
A.S. Coleman , From cataloging to metadata: Dublin Core records for the library catalog, Cataloging and Classification Quarterly40(3/4) (2005) 153-81.
95.
A.C. Thurman , Metadata standards for archival control: an introduction to EAD and EAC, Cataloging and Classification Quarterly40(3/4) (2005) 183-212.
96.
P. Polydoratou , Using web logs transactions to assess a metadata registry system's use, OCLC Systems and Services22(1) (2006). 67-79.
97.
V. Srinivas , G. Fatih, N. Saravanakumar and D. Hasan, Gathering meta-data and instances from object referral lists on the web, Online Information Review30(3) (2006) 278-96.
98.
J. Greenberg , Understanding metadata and metadata schemes , Cataloging and Classification Quarterly40(3/4) ( 2005) 17-36.
99.
R.M. Losee , Browsing mixed structured and unstructured data , Information Processing and Management42(2) (2006) 440-52.
100.
D. Nicholson , Interpretive journeys and METS, Journal of Documentation62(2) (2006) 271-90.
101.
L. Ferraioli , An exploratory study of metadata creation in a health care agency, Cataloging and Classification Quarterly40(3/4) (2005) 75-102.
B. Allen , Knowledge organization in an information retrieval task, Information Processing and Management26(4) (1990) 535-42.
104.
S. Allen and J. Matheson, Development of a semantic differential to access users' attitudes towards a batch mode information retrieval system (ERIC), Journal of the American Society for Information Science28(5) ( 1977) 268-72.
105.
W.S. Cooper , The potential usefulness of catalog access points other than author, title, and subject, Journal of the American Society for Information Science21(2) (1970) 112-27.
106.
D. Davidson , The effect of individual differences of cognitive style on judgments of document relevance, Journal of the American Society for Information Science28(5) (1977) 273-84.
107.
S. Benferhat , S. Lagrue and O. Papini, Belief change and pre-orders: a brief overview, International Journal of Geographical Information Science18(4) (2004) 353-88.
108.
L.Z. Cooper , Methodology for a project examining cognitive categories for library information in young children, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology53(14) (2002) 1223-31.
109.
S. Brier , Cybersemiotics: a new interdisciplinary development applied to the problems of knowledge organization and document retrieval in information science, Journal of Documentation52(3) (1996) 296-344.
110.
G. Salton , Information science in a PhD computer science program, Communications of the ACM12(2) (1969) 111-17.
111.
C. Glaviano , Teaching an information organization course with Nordic DC metadata creator, OCLC Systems and Services16(1) ( 2000) 33-40.
112.
I. Hsieh-Yee , Cataloging and metadata education: asserting a central role in information organization, Cataloging and Classification Quarterly34(1/2) (2002) 203-22.
113.
R. Harvey and S. Reynolds, MARCup to markup: education for cataloguing and classification in Australia, Cataloging and Classification Quarterly41(3/4) (2006)173-92.
114.
P. Hider and R. Mohammed, Ensuring cataloging students meet the mark: testing the validity of a cataloging worksheet marking scheme , Journal of Education for Library and Information Science46(1) ( 2005) 3-20.
115.
K.M. Letarte , M.R. Turvey, D. Borneman and D.L. Adams, Practitioner perspectives on cataloging education for entry-level academic librarians, Library Resources and Technical Services46(1) (2002) 11-22.
116.
K.S. Raghavan , Education for knowledge organization: the Indian scene, Cataloging and Classification Quarterly41(2) (2005) 105-19.
117.
M.R. Turvey and K.M. Letarte, Cataloging or knowledge management: perspectives of library educators on cataloging education for entry-level academic librarians, Cataloging and Classification Quarterly34(1/2) (2002) 165-87.
118.
N. Neelameghan , Knowledge and skills for content organization in web-based products, Information Studies11(3) (2005) 139-44.
119.
V. Rosenberg , Comparative evaluation of two indexing methods using judges, Journal of the American Society for Information Science22(4) (1971) 251-9.
120.
L.M. Gomez, C.C. Lochbaum and T.K. Landauer, All the right words: finding what you want as a function of richness of indexing vocabulary, Journal of the American Society for Information Science41(8) (1990) 547-59.
121.
P.A. Richmond , Classification from PRECIS: some possibilities , Journal of the American Society for Information Science27(4) ( 1976) 240-47.
122.
G. Qian , Q. Zhu , Q. Xue and S. Pramanik, A space-partitioning-based indexing method for multidimensional non-ordered discrete data spaces, ACM Transactions on Information Systems24(1) (2006) 79-110.
123.
G. Retti and B. Stehno, The Laurin Thesaurus: a large, multilingual, electronic thesaurus for newspaper clipping archives, Journal of Documentation60(3) (2004) 289-301.
124.
D..Soergel , A universal source thesaurus as a classification generator, Journal of the American Society for Information Science23(5) (1972) 299-305.
125.
W. Zhang , The development and structure of the Chinese thesaurus for subject indexing, International Information and Library Review36(1) (2004) 47-54.
126.
A.A. Shiri and C. Revie, Thesauri on the web: current developments and trends, Online Information Review24(4) (2000) 273-9.
127.
H.H. Neville , Feasibility study of a scheme for reconciling thesauri covering a common subject, Journal of Documentation26(4) ( 1970) 313-36.
128.
R.T. Niehoff , Development of an integrated energy vocabulary and the possibilities for on-line subject switching, Journal of the American Society for Information Science27(1) (1976):3-17.
129.
I. Dahlberg , The Broad System of Ordering (BSO) as a basis for an integrated social science thesaurus? International Classification7(2) (1982) 66-72.
130.
F.W. Lancaster and L.C. Smith, Compatibility Issues Affecting Information Systems and Services, PGI-33/WS/23 (Unesco General Information Programme, Paris, 1983).
131.
A.Y. Chamis , Vocabulary Control and Search Strategies in Online Searching ( Greenwood Press, Westport, CO, 1991 ).
132.
H. Milli and R. Rada, Merging thesauri: principles and evaluation , IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence10(2) ( 1988) 204-220.
133.
J.P. Silvester , An operational system for subject switching between controlled vocabularies, Information Processing and Management29(1) (1993) 47-59.
134.
C. Whitehead , Mapping LCSH into thesauri: the AAT Model. In: T. Petersen and P. Molholt (eds), Beyond the Book: Extending MARC for Subject Access (Hall, Boston, MA, 1990) 81-96.
135.
M.A. Chaplan , Mapping Laborline thesaurus terms to Library of Congress subject headings: implications for vocabulary switching, Library Quarterly65(1) (1995) 39-61.
