Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2013 22:59:17 -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)

Looking at the Journal of Documentation  we can read more too:

on the "Return of Documentation"  with another perspective too

http://sci.scientific-direct.net/view_online.asp?1053294&a78699f88ee68665&18

Museums are now called "Memory Institutions"  but they were always there too

most also had libraries with long histories in them.  before they were
called "memory institutions"

Ok, I'll stop there and let the experts explain better   :)

All I believe however, is that there exist still many gaps in the
research still

  / Best Karen Weaver



On 9/8/13, Karen Weaver <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>> 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]
>>>
>>
>>
>