- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 17:42:13 +0100
- To: tiago.murakami@itau.com.br
- Cc: "Miles, AJ (Alistair)" <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>, public-esw-thes@w3.org
tiago.murakami@itau.com.br wrote: >Hi All, > >There is a problem: Folksonomies are not a Controlled Vocabulary. > > > My view is that they are controlled, just in a different way. On my blog I control my keywords / categories, and arrange them in a basic hierarchy. On flickr, I do the same with my "tags" that I assign to photos. In both contexts I do this with some thought for how they relate to the categories used by my friends and colleagues. And in both cases, there are tools to expose these categories in RDF/SKOS. They're certainly not controlled in the classic library sense, but they are organised; sometimes carefully, sometimes carelessly. The weblog case is more clearly "controlled vocabulary" than Flickr (based only on current UI). This is because in my blog, when I post an article via Wordpress, it offers me a list of my existing categories as the options for categorising a post. On Flickr there is a free-text entry field instead. But UIs can change easily: the practice in both systems leads people to use the same category/keyword over again. Short version: folksonomies are "locally-controlled vocabularies", perhaps? Dan
Received on Sunday, 9 October 2005 16:42:10 UTC