This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
The one piece of information that was new to me was this: Folksonomy versus collabulary One outcome from the practice of tagging has been the rise of the ???folksonomy??? folksonomy??? By aggregating the results of folksonomy production it is possible to see how additional value can be created. keyword to use. Vander Wal, 2005).
Home About Me Subscribe Zen and the Art of Nonprofit Technology Thoughtful and sometimes snarky perspectives on nonprofit technology Tagging Discussion January 6, 2007 Beth started a cross-blog discussion about tagging and folksonomies, and I thought I’d weigh in. But is efficiency the most important thing?
First up, after this post, will be an investigation tagging and folksonomies. The technologies generally connected to Web 2.0 Jumping on any technology bandwagon has its pitfalls, and this one is no different. So, what’s on tap? Then, I’ll talk about RSS and XML. These are, I think, the two most important aspects of Web 2.0
asks: "Is there any living, breathing example of a taxonomic approach working (scaling) to keep-up with the hyper-efficiency we see in peer-production systems? " Marnie Webb also points out another way that a folksonomy can help improve a taxonomy - with maintenance. I'm being quite serious here.
particularly RSS and folksonomies, are aspects of Web 2.0 Obviously, the biggest change is the ubiquitous nature of Web 2.0, and the ways it’s made itself into the nonprofit sector. I think that a lot of Web 2.0, Freelance Switch Gavin’s Digital Diner Idealware Jon Stahl’s Journal Lifehacker LinuxChix – Be Polite.
Home About Me Subscribe Zen and the Art of Nonprofit Technology Thoughtful and sometimes snarky perspectives on nonprofit technology Google Analytics vs Site Meter September 18, 2006 Yes, I promise, the post on tagging and folksonomies is coming. But first, a great example of Web 1.0
Let's begin with big picture question that Gavin raised: What purpose do folksonomies serve? Gavin's post does a great job explaining the definitions and the advantages of a taxonomy over a folksonomy. He observes that folksonomies are in the early stages of development. How are they different from taxonomies?
You get more out of the system when the motivation is selfish. so those tags work well for you, but not necessarily the social system. and folksonomy.??? folksonomy. What are you going to do as the system gets larger???? I let activity happened, and then I figure out the activity and compensate the system.
The result of these ad hoc collaborations was a folksonomy of terms of nonprofit technology related news and a community of taggers. for customizing the Digg experience, enhancing the recommendation system across other areas of the site, creating deeper category and topic content views and more ways to discover and organize content.
Twitter, however, is distinctive in that it reserves its own name for its tagging system; "hashtags." What Value Do Folksonomies Bring To The Online Museum Collection? While each of these channels has their own mechanisms and conventions for using tags the primary function of those tags remains the same - organizing content.
If visitors can assign their own tags to artifacts, then we can create visitor-generated folksonomies alongside traditional taxonomies—and people who are searching for content can find artifacts of interest via either path. Why are folksonomies useful? Traditional taxonomies may only cover a certain set of metadata about an object.
Tough Talk About Tagging - Chronicle.com: "A few years ago, it seemed as if everyone was talking about folksonomies — Web projects that let users “tag” items with keywords and create their own collaborative categorization systems. And to be sure, there have been plenty of folksonomic success stories.
In many smaller organizations, where there are not enough resources for a high-end knowledge management system, people end up using their browser favorites or forward links to one another via email. s a folksonomy. Unfortunately, these methods make sharing and managing information resources difficult. t get bogged down ???
Start thinking about tagging and folksonomies. Has your tagging system increased overall google hits for the museum? Do you want to become a community nexus? Start working the social network sites. Do you want visitors to contribute to the classification and presentation of your artifacts? Keep statistics.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 12,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content