---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2013 21:41:11 -0400
From: Karen Weaver <[log in to unmask]>
To: Open Lib/Info Sci Education Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Users, Technology and Knowledge (fwd)

>> KW: Why is "documentation" in your "technology section" ?
>
> GW: Given my background with information technolgy, I associate documentation
> with instructions on how to use information technology. If you have a
> better place for it, I'd be happy to hear about your suggestions.
>
>> KW: Bibliography was always associated with "documentation" roots btw
>> much more than "technology"   jumped that bandwagon
>
>GW :  I don't understand your comment here.  I associate "bibliography" with a
> disciple or culture, and "documentation" with an information technology.
> Please explain your ideas.

a good start is here for definitions
Bibliography -- please see:

http://www.bibsocamer.org/bibdef.htm


You seem to associate "documentation" with your background in
information technology, in terms of what I would call technical
writing ie documentation as for a manual how to use something / or
programs.

Mine is quite different.  bibliography, citations , a record of the
information that exists  ie documenting that record -the long record
of it.  this can be in print or online e-resources aka via information
technology and basic print or manuscripts , any formats old or new

your view of documentation i would call 'instructions'  not the record of it.
it's a big problem  - terminologies / backgrounds / and yes biases too
when its more a lack of basic communication/understanding of where the
other person/group is coming from

--cheers KW


On 9/8/13, Gretchen Whitney <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2013 11:08:59 -0400
>> From: Karen Weaver <[log in to unmask]>
>>
>
> Good questions.
>
>> "People"  not the equivalent of "Users"
>
> These are the two terms used in the examples that I found.  I would define
> "people" as the total population in the community that you serve.  I would
> define "users" as the people who actually use your services through
> whatever technology.  Remember that there are likely to be a whole lot of
> "people" who don't for whatever reason. Remember that there was also a
> push to connect this triumverate with a local acronym to make it cute
> /h/h/h/h memorable, so that if you were a "University" you were more
> likely to use "users" than "people."
>
>> "Information" not the equivalent of "Knowledge"
>
> The differences between data, information, knowledge, and wisdom is a
> classic question.  They are indeed, very different (IMHO).
>
> We begin with poetry (and Frank Zappa).  I refer you to:
>
> http://poeticsofthought.wordpress.com/tag/t-s-eliot/
>
> which presents the important lines from The Rock.
>
> Then, examine
>
> http://tinyurl.com/pzxdo35
>
> which appears to be some kind of course document, undated, from the U
> Illinois about 2011.  It primarily repeats Ackoff's assertions from 1989.
> (ref. included, that seems to be the classic work).  I'd personally push
> Wisdom more toward the spiritual end of things, but at least the author
> acknowledges that the question exists.
>
> A counterpunch is at
>
> http://www.academia.edu/343239/The_data-information-knowledge-wisdom_hierarchy_and_its_antithesis
>
> which I was able to get to by ignoring demands to sign up for various
> accounts with services.
>
>> Names of an organization do not define "information science" either-
>> why would it?
>
> An organization might in its mission statement or elsewhere define
> "information science", if that phrase is part of its name.  It might use
> the definition to distinguish itself from others also using the phrase as
> part of their name.  Mission statements and other
> associations/organization documents are a logical place to look for
> definitions.
>
>> Why is "documentation" in your "technology section" ?
>
> Given my background with information technolgy, I associate documentation
> with instructions on how to use information technology. If you have a
> better place for it, I'd be happy to hear about your suggestions.
>
>> Bibliography was always associated with "documentation" roots btw
>> much more than "technology"   jumped that bandwagon
>
> I don't understand your comment here.  I associate "bibliography" with a
> disciple or culture, and "documentation" with an information technology.
> Please explain your ideas.
>
> --gw
>
> <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
> Gretchen Whitney, PhD, Retired
> School of Information Sciences
> University of Tennessee, Knoxville TN 37996 USA           [log in to unmask]
> http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/
> jESSE:http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/jesse.html
> SIGMETRICS:http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html
> <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
>
>>
>> Just some morning thoughts/ponders,
>>  cheers KW
>>
>> On 9/7/13, Gretchen Whitney <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>> Greetings,
>>>    I am just reporting observations, and not being critical or
>>> judgemental.
>>>
>>> But I wonder if these phrases form a decent definition of information
>>> science, so elusive after 60 years.
>>>
>>>    I first ran into this triumvirate twenty years ago (get the UTK
>>> thing?)
>>> and at that time it was my first exposure to the intersection of these
>>> ideas under Jose-Marie G.  It was exciting. No one that I had run into
>>> before had ever pulled this Venn diagram together.
>>>    Twenty years later, I'm seeing the same thing presented at Penn State
>>> (http://bulletins.psu.edu/undergrad/courses/A/IST/110) as an
>>> undergraduate
>>> course as a Brand New Concept.
>>>    The triumvirate is also presented as "information, people, and
>>> technology" at the current iSchools website at
>>>
>>> http://ischools.org/
>>>
>>>    I looked at ALISE.org, and it doesn't have a mission statement, and
>>> doesn't include these words (or any others, for that matter).
>>>
>>>    I looked at the ASIST.org web site, and they are still celebrating
>>> the
>>> name change to "and Technology" which happened what, a decade ago? "This
>>> year's conference theme offers an opportunity to reflect on all the
>>> changes that impact on human information interaction and their
>>> implications for information science and technology." Sort of the right
>>> words.
>>>
>>> In other words, there is still not a good definition of "information
>>> science" out there.
>>>
>>>
>>>    I googled "information technology people" and came up with a journal
>>> at
>>> http://www.itandpeople.org/
>>>    which might be worth paying attention to, in its 26th year of
>>> publication.
>>>
>>>    I googled "users technology knowledge" which turned up a bunch of
>>> articles containing one or two terms but not three.
>>>
>>>    I looked at the Wikipedia article for the definition of "information
>>> science" and it was the usual mishmash of unconnected topics. The ideas
>>> here are not bad, and not irrelevant.  I wonder what they would look
>>> like
>>> if they were re-organized under the people - users/information -
>>> knowledge
>>> /information technology framework.
>>>
>>>    Is there a decent definition of information science in this mess?  I
>>> think that there is.  In multiple layers.
>>>
>>>    First layer.  Venn diagram and explain the intersection of users -
>>> people/information - knowledge/information technology.
>>>
>>>    Second layer.  Explain these sectors.  Yes, in full this means in the
>>> information - knowledge section how publishing works, where books come
>>> from, how books are published via the web, history of books, meaning of
>>> bibliography, the whole nine yards.  How cultures are preserved via the
>>> written word.  In full in the information technology section this means
>>> going back to hieroglyphics and the creation of and preservation of the
>>> written word, but also telegraphs and their relationship to text msging,
>>> the written vs spoken word (the telephone), representation of language
>>> and
>>> letters (ASCII eg), verbal vs graphic representations of information,
>>> computing as priesthood and personal computers, networked information.
>>> I
>>> know very little about users and how they process/acquire information.
>>>
>>>    Third layer:  How these three sectors interact.
>>>
>>>
>>>    This foundation for a definition of "information science" in the
>>> intersection of "people - users/information - knowledge/ information
>>> technology"  both avoids, and embraces folks who try to distinguish
>>> between informatics, computer science, natural or engineered information
>>> systems, philosophical systems regarding epistemology.  The history of
>>> science goes in the Knowledge section.  Documentation goes in the
>>> Technology section.  Everyone has a place.
>>>
>>>    The base phrase is "information science."  It is defined as the
>>> intersection between "people, information, and technology".
>>>
>>>    We're done for the night.  Happy Saturday, everyone.
>>>
>>>    --gw
>>>
>>>
>>> <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
>>> Gretchen Whitney, PhD, Retired
>>> School of Information Sciences
>>> University of Tennessee, Knoxville TN 37996 USA
>>> [log in to unmask]
>>> http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/
>>> jESSE:http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/jesse.html
>>> SIGMETRICS:http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html
>>> <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
>>>
>> Karen Weaver MLS
>> Digital Projects Assistant, Systems
>> Duquesne University, Gumberg Library
>> 600 Forbes Ave
>> Pittsburgh PA 15282
>> Email: [log in to unmask] / [log in to unmask]
>>
>
>