W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-esw-thes@w3.org > October 2005

Re: [PORT] new editor's working draft of SKOS Core Vocab Spec

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 17:42:13 +0100
Message-ID: <43494865.7090705@w3.org>
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?

Received on Sunday, 9 October 2005 16:42:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 2 March 2016 13:32:06 UTC