i d e a n t: Tag Literacy
Popularity Report
 |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Rank
URL Tag Cloud
Bookmark History
Saved by 47 people (-11 private), first by anonymouse user on 2006-03-02
- Marcora on 2009-11-18 - Tags tagging , gmarks
- Franck_v on 2009-02-05 - Tags
- Avdigrimm on 2008-03-27 - Tags collaboration , community , folksonomy , language , metadata , ontology , semantic , social , software , to-read , web
- Malin_c on 2008-03-21 - Tags classification , del.icio.us , folksonomies , metadata , social
- Deusx23 on 2008-03-21 - Tags delicious , folksonomy , metadata , tagging
Public Sticky notes
Part of the allure of classifying things by assigning tags to them is that the user can give free reign to sloppiness. There is no authority —human or computational— passing judgment on the appropriateness or validity of tags, because tags have to make sense first and foremost to the individual who assigns and uses them. And yet, the whole point of distributed classification systems (DCSs) such as del.icio.us and flickr is that the aggregation of inherently private goods (tags and what they describe) has public value: When people use the same tag to point to different resources they are organizing knowledge in a manner, commonly referred to as a folksonomy, that makes sense to them and to others like them.
Highlighted by sibipoortman
Part of the allure of classifying things by assigning tags to them is that the user can give free reign to sloppiness. There is no authority —human or computational— passing judgment on the appropriateness or validity of tags, because tags have to make sense first and foremost to the individual who assigns and uses them. And yet, the whole point of distributed classification systems (DCSs) such as del.icio.us and flickr is that the aggregation of inherently private goods (tags and what they describe) has public value:
Highlighted by vuorikari
. . . the code of SBSs removes [sic] the need for humans to negotiate meaning around
classification. This can be liberating as well as alienating. Liberating because, as I
suggested above, there is no governing body dictating what the classification scheme
should be. Alienating because, without the mechanisms for deliberation, meaning
becomes atomistic, a reflection of what the software has parsed and aggregated from
detached individuals, not what has emerged through consensus and deliberation.
Highlighted by champignon
Part of the allure of classifying things by assigning tags to them is that the user can give free reign to sloppiness. There is no authority —human or computational— passing judgment on the appropriateness or validity of tags, because tags have to make sense first and foremost to the individual who assigns and uses them. And yet, the whole point of distributed classification systems (DCSs) such as del.icio.us and flickr is that the aggregation of inherently private goods (tags and what they describe) has public value: When people use the same tag to point to different resources they are organizing knowledge in a manner, commonly referred to as a folksonomy, that makes sense to them and to others like them. In other words, the tag is the object that brings a resource and a social group together via the shared meaning of a word (although tags also serve to form connections between words and new meanings, as for example when you encounter a link to the Center for Alternative Technology when looking at the tag 'cat').
Highlighted by htompkin
Public Comment
on 2006-08-25 by fuzzyface