Diese Präsentation wurde erfolgreich gemeldet.
Wir verwenden Ihre LinkedIn Profilangaben und Informationen zu Ihren Aktivitäten, um Anzeigen zu personalisieren und Ihnen relevantere Inhalte anzuzeigen. Sie können Ihre Anzeigeneinstellungen jederzeit ändern.

INFO 653 Posters, Fall 2019

199 Aufrufe

Veröffentlicht am

Final posters from Pratt Institute School of Information's INFO 653 class of Fall 2019.

Veröffentlicht in: Bildung
  • Login to see the comments

  • Gehören Sie zu den Ersten, denen das gefällt!

INFO 653 Posters, Fall 2019

  1. 1. Img 3: Radical Cataloging: Indigenous Knowledge Organization (IKO) INFO 653-01: FA19 Instructor: Dr. Cristina Pattueli Andreas Jonathan, Nicole Marconi, GabrielPalisano Sources: 1.Doyle, A. M., Lawson, K., &Dupont, S. (2015). Indigenization of Knowledge Organization at the Xwi7xwa Library (University of British Columbia). https://doi. org/10.14288/1.0103204 2.Montenegro, M. Subverting the universality of metadata standards: The TK labels as a tool to promote Indigenous data sovereignty | Emerald Insight. (n.d.). Retrieved December 1, 2019, from https://www-emerald-com.ezproxy.pratt.edu/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JD-08-2018-0124/full/html 3.Knight, F.T.(2019). Words and Worldviews: Decolonizing Description. Librarian Publications &Presentations. Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku. ca/librarians/29 4.Cherry, A., &Mukunda, K. (2015). A Case Study in Indigenous Classification: Revisiting and Reviving the Brian Deer Scheme. Cataloging &Classification Quarterly, 53(5–6), 548–567. Retrieved November 11, 2019, from https://doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2015.1008717 5.Duarte, M. e. ( 1 ), &Belarde-Lewis, M. ( 2 ). (2015). Imagining: Creating spaces for indigenous ontologies. Cataloging and Classification Quarterly, 53(5–6), 677–702. Img 1. UBC Library Communications and Marketing. (2018). 29826553797_d7ba9f21f7_b.jpg [Image]. Retrieved from https://www.flickr.com/photos/ubcli- brary/29826553797 Img 2. Local Contexts (2012). Screenshot of Local Contexts Traditional Knowledge (TK) Labels Website [Screenshot]. Retrieved from https://localcontexts.org/tk-labels/ Img 3. Artists Space (2016). Decolonize This Place Sticker [Image]. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/artistsspace/status/776789050313310209 colonialism that sought to reduce entire communities to call numbers. It is a system principally concerned with providinglegible access to indigenous information materials and artifacts for the benefit of indigenous populations. Our project sought to centralize the voices and efforts of indigenous catalogers while contextualizing their efforts within a broader history of exploitation and theft. We explore the background that necessitates these radical developments in cataloging while highlighting the work that is being done by information professionals to create new systems, vocabularies, and ontologies within formal library institutions. Discussion includes how these schema not only restructure our previous understanding of history, but also contribute to the repatriation of stolen artifacts. and the education of underserved indigenous communities. Many collections - from their contents to the nature of their organization - are built upon the foundation of 19th and 20th century field guides that conceptualized indigenous objects and knowledge as resources for extraction and research. the Musqueam and Squamish, Salish Nations including 1 The Xwi7xwa Library The Xwei7wa Library is an Aboriginal Library and House of Knowledge, and member of the University of British Columbia Library system. Located on the unceded territory of Coast “[Decolonizing Description] doesn’t change the underlying problem with a system that does not reflect indigenous worldviews...[Indigenous worldviews] are focused less on the boundaries between concepts and more on an awareness of the connections between all things. “ - F.Tim Knight3 Indigenous Knowledge Brian Deer Classification System The Brian Deer Classification System is an an IKO system developed in the 1970s by Kahnawake Mohawk librarian, Alec Brian Deer.The system was designed with the needs and worldviews of the Assembly of First Nations in Ottawa in mind.4 Systems While keeping in mind the great diversity among Indigenous Nations, Indigenous Ways of Knowing share a focus in the relatedness of the world’s phenomena as opposed to the Western tradition of partition based on difference.Indigenous epistemology emphasizes relationships between the notions of self, community, and land. LCSH relegates works concerning Indigenous peoples to the E schedules, reserved for “History of the Americas” Library of Congress Subject Headings “...Western classification and documentation practices typically assimilate living Indigenous cultures into existing schemes designed to treat collections as fragmented and static materials preserving ‘frozen’ knowledge.” - Maria Montenegro2 Institutional Reform Libraries and Musuems have a particular colonial relationship to the Indigenous materials in their collections. Intentionally and unintentionally, they have historically replicated the practice of freezing Indigenous groups in historical subjecthood. This is accomplished by keeping Indigenous materials in historic schedules or attempting to place artifacts (originally taken from Indigenous communties) within dioramas that imagine “how they were once used”. Indigenous people continue to fightfor intellectual property rights, repatriation, & accessible representation within organization schemes. Traditional Knowledge Traditional Knowledge (TK) Labels are a set of 17 digital tags that can be included in a record as associated metadata in ILSs, CMSs, and databases. The labels were collaboratively developed by several indigenous groups and designed for the use of communities who are unable to assert legal control due to Western conceptions of authorship and ownership.2 Participatory Platforms: The Power to Name Information Professionals must recognize the power differentials between those who have institutionally been given the power to name those historicaly positioned as the subjet being named. Working to deconstruct this relationship must entail en- gaging Indigenous knowledge holders an information pro- fessionals as leaders. Indigenous communities decide what remedies and repatria- tion should look like. oday’s knowledge organization systems are the products of Ta long history of development and refinement in approaches to collecting, categorizing, and preserving information while making it retrievable to both scholars and members of the general public. However, this history has been concomitant with a timeline of imperial and colonial conquest; it isan inextricable part of an entangled narrative of dispossession, resource extraction, and violent repression. Within this process, classificatory practices have often served as tools for the erasure and dehumanization of colonized peoples, cultures, and histories. The ongoing marginalization ofindigenous peoples has been explicitly encodedin the ways their cultural products - from everyday objects to artistic works tobodies themselves - are preserved and presented. Indigenous knowledge organization is a radical departure from thelegacy of settler Decolonizing Knowledge Organization Current practices of Knowledge Organization and metadata creation prioritize universality and interoperability at the expense of source communities being able to identify with their own histories. Making Indigenous knowledge intelligible to source communities through IKO, is a matter of data sovreignty & repatriation; and re- positions indigenous knowledge as subject to the laws and practices of the people who are responsible for its creation rather than its collection. Decolonization is a political project that encompasses over 500 years of Indigenous resistence to settler colonialism. Decolonization work is about deconstructing our own occupation of unceded territory and reasserting Indigenous sovereignty and cultural autonomy.5 From Cultural Cleansing to Cultural Revitalizaton ff ive Img 1: Img. 2
  2. 2. GLAM + Linked Open Data (LOD) Kelli Hayes, Heidi Klise, Alejandra Perez, Joanna Thompson What is Linked Open Data? Linked Data is structured information in a format meant for machines to understand. To make this information readable, Linked Data uses web standard technologies like HTTP and URIs. This enables data from different sources to be connected and queried. Linked Open Data (LOD) refers to data that is made available for public use via Linked Data. The objective of LOD is to allow data from various resources to be interconnected, queried and ultimately more useful. “Good” LOD 1.Available on the Web (whatever format) but with an open license, to be Open Data 2.Available as machine-readable structured data (e.g. excel instead of image scan of a table) 3.As (2) plus non-proprietary format (e.g. CSV instead of excel) 4.All of the above, plus Use open standards from W3C (RDF and SPARQL) to identity things, so that people can point at your stuff 5.All of the above, plus: Link your data to other people’s data to provide context Fig. 1: LOD in GLAM The implementation of Linked Open Data in the GLAM world could better connect different sources of information for scholarly research. Catalogs currently function as a means to find more information about what the patron already knows. LOD can change that by facilitating more discoverability of the wide array of sources that libraries and information organizations have. Fig. 4: “Examining BIBFRAME 2.0 from the Viewpoint of RDA Metadata Schema” Future of Linked Open Data Bibframe (Bibliographic Framework) is an initiative to implement bibliographic standards for cataloguing digital metadata so that online resources can be made available beyond the library community. Bibframe 2.0 catalogs information according to three core levels of abstraction: Work, Instance, & Item. Wikidata, American Art Collaborative, and more LOD initiatives are being implemented in GLAMs to expand access to resources online. The nature of the web and of digital resources necessitates a cataloging format and metadata schema that records accurate relationships between born digital materials and that references URIs (the “shelves” of the Internet). References https://bit.ly/33ENaMu LOD Principles Once the data is created, Tim Berners-Lee gives four rules for creating Linked Data for the Semantic Web: 1.Use of Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs) 2.Use HTTP URIs so that people can look up those names 3.When someone looks up URL, provide useful information using the standards (RDF, SPARQL) 4.Include links to other URIs so that they can discover more things RDF triples Resource Description Framework (RDF) is a data model that, through XML syntax, represents resources that reside on the Web. The core of an RDF statement is the triple, which is made of a subject, predicate and an object. The predicate connects the subject and object- creating links. Fig. 2: “Linked Data” Wordlift Fig. 3: “The basic semantic triple model” INFO 653 Knowledge Organization | Fall 2019 | Dr. C. Pattuelli Fig. 1: “The Linked Open Data Cloud” lod-cloud.net
  3. 3. Cataloging Time-Based Media for GLAM Definition: works of art that can change meaningfully with respect to time Types of Time-Based Media: video, sound artworks, video cassettes, CDs, slide-based installations Challenges: no cataloging standard that can be used by all of GLAM, focus on conservation instead of cataloging Libraries Archives Museums & Galleries History ● The digital preservation and conservation of time-based media. ● To help mitigate human knowledge loss in specialty formats, hardware, and process history. ● Ensure longevity, access to artwork, and remain true to the artist’s intention upon installation. Metadata to describe physical attributes Process History: Recording the migration history of a digital artwork. Draw from cross- disciplinary schemas: PBcore, METS, PREMIS, reVTMD, MPEG ● GLAMS are collaboratively working together to address the stewardship of Time-Based Media collections. ● Linked Data offers the possibility of inter-relating archival information by bridging divides between different schema and databases. 19th - early 20th century Standards of cataloging developed to cope with bound volumes and serials ● DACS can be used to describe time-based archival records, but it is not specific to time-based media. ● Some digital archives, like the Rhizome ArtBase, have created their own schema:1949 - 1952 - Addressing non-book material Rules for Descriptive Cataloging in the Library of Congress: Phonorecords; Motion Pictures and Filmstrips 1967 - 1978 - Incorporating non-book material standards with other standards Anglo-American Cataloging Rules to AACR2 Today - Further incorporation Resource Description and Access Griesinger, P. (2016). Process history metadata for time-based media artworks at the Museum of Modern Art, New York. 4, 12. Weihs, J. (2001). A Somewhat Personal History of Nonbook Cataloguing. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 31(3-4), 159-188. DOI: 10.1300/J104v31n03_03 Malssen, K.V. (2014). BIBFRAME av modeling study: defining a flexible model for description of audiovisual resources. Retrieved from www.loc.gov/bibframe/docs/pdf/bibframe-avmodelingstudy- may15-2014.pdf. Fino-Radin, B. (2011). “Digital Preservation Practices and the Rhizome ArtBase.” Retrieved from http://media.rhizome.org/artbase/documents/Digital-Preservation-Practices-and-the-Rhizome-ArtBase.pdf Sources Simi Best, Hepzi Rapoport, Michelle Rosario, and Hilary Wang INFO 653-02, Fall 2019 Dr. Cristina Patuelli Use of Metadata Image: Eadweard Muybridge, Animal Locomotion, Plate 626, 1887, Courtesy National Gallery of Art, Washington
  4. 4. “QUEERING” THECATALOG Laura Indick, Nikki Lopez, Katherine Renzelmann History Beginning around 1970, a coalition of librarian and non-librarian activists pushed for equal representation in classification systems such as Dewey and LCC. One of the most influential advocacy groups was ALA’s Gay, Lesbian, & Bisexual Task Force, founded in 1970. Under the long term leadership of Barbara Gittings, its members pushed for the adoption of positive LGBTQ+ subject headings. Barbara Gittings INFO-653 Fall 2019 LGBTQ Center of Durham Volunteer-led group of librarians came together to create an inclusive classification system for the LGBTQ Center of Durham. This ongoing project is expected to take two years to thoroughly figure out how to respect LGBTQ representation and weave the community members into the conversation of creating a new system. . They approached this goal by: ● Drafting a call number system (fiction & nonfiction) ● Creating a system using stickers for labeling fiction groupings (gay, lesbian, etc…) ● Applying the developed system to books in the collection ● Creating new and or for more complex items (leave room to grow) Logo for LGBTQ Center of Durham Future Directions Rapidly changing vocabulary around queer terminology makes it difficult for classification systems to keep up. Library professionals have come up with a few ways to potentially alter queer cataloging in order to be more accurate and more inclusive of LGBTQ individuals. Some popular proposed solutions include: more communication with LGBTQ community centers, creating multiple access points by subjects or keywords, integrating tagging systems into Online Public Access Catalogs, and new and non-standardized classification systems. In contrast to these options, some argue that while the catalog should be updated with new terms, old ones should not be changed. LibraryThing integrated into Martindale College’s OPAC References Adler, M. (2009). Transcending Library Catalogs: A Comparative Study of Controlled Terms in Library of Congress Subject Headings and User-Generated Tags in LibraryThing for Transgender Books. Journal of Web Librarianship, 3(4), 309–331.https://doi.org/10.1080/19322900903341099 Carmichael, J.V. (Ed.) (1998). Daring to find our names: The search for lesbigay library history(1-23). Westport, CT, & London, UK: Greenwood Press. Drabinski, E. (2013). Queering the Catalog: Queer Theory and the Politics of Correction. The Library Quarterly, 83(2), 94–111. doi: 10.1086/669547 Edge, S. J. (2019). A Subject “Queer”-y: A Literature Review on Subject Access to LGBTIQ Materials. The Serials Librarian, 75(1–4), 81–90.https://doi.org/10.1080/0361526X.2018.1556190 Ewing, K. (2019). Beyond Dewey: Creating an LGBTQ Classification System at the LGBTQ Center of Durham. Advances in Librarianship LGBTQ Librarianship in the 21st Century: Emerging Directions of Advocacy and Community Engagement in Diverse Information Environments, 225–242. doi: 10.1108/s0065-283020190000045017. Gough, C., & Greenblatt, E. (Eds.) (1990). Gay and lesbian library service (75-101). Jefferson, NC & London: McFarland & Company, Inc. Greenblatt, E. (Ed.) (2011). Serving LGBTIQ library and archives users: essays on outreach, service, collections and access (212-228). Jefferson, NC & London: McFarland & Company, Inc. Roberto, K.R. (Ed.) (2008). Radical cataloging: essays at the front. Jefferson, NC & London: McFarland & Company, Inc. OPAC Baucom, E. (2018). An Exploration into Archival Descriptions of LGBTQ Materials. The American Archivist, 81(1), 65–83.https://doi.org/10.17723/0360-9081-81.1.65. Queer Theory Queer Theory invites resistance instead of extension of the coherent library systems that a critical cataloging movement uphold. Proper cataloging practices can reveal the process through which these categories and knowledge about them are produced. Queer Headings in LCSH 1946: Homosexuality added (see also: Sexual Perversion.) 1972: Gay Liberation Movement added 1976: Homosexuals and Lesbians appear in LCSH 1987: Gay replacesHomosexual Today: “Queer” appears 3 times in LCSH: Queer Theory, Queer Theology, and the UF “Queer Community” under Sexual Minority Community.