Yesterday, in class, we explored Concept Space, http://conceptspace.london.edu/, the visual search tool for business concepts. It is the only working interface that I know of where the concepts are generated from a bibliographic classification scheme - a classsification scheme used by two libraries in UK business schools (London and Manchester) - for Management Education literature. The concepts are also linked to a variety of information resources (books held by the libraries, journal articles in electronic databases, and WWW resources). The classification scheme itself is also interesting because it divides all concepts in management education into three broad categories: 1) The Enterprise, 2) The Environment, and 3) Techniques for Analysis and includes a related class, Information Science. Browsing the class of Information Science (I couldn't' tell if this is an Environment category but suspect it is) we find that Libraries form many narrower concepts. Libraries of different types, for example. Unfortunately, the IS concepts are not inclusive of all that LIS schools today try to cover:
http://conceptspace.london.edu/main.asp?id=YA&;term=Information+science
For example, Information Architecture is missing. Can you identify the other LIS core areas of study that are missing? Is there a class Library Science in this scheme? I suspect not but I could be wrong - surprise me.
What I like best about ConceptSpace is that the concepts are actually from a traditional library scheme. Contrary to public understanding, libraries don't just create schemes out of thin air. Special classification schemes especially are often grounded in classification theory and disciplinary principles.
Also, ConceptSpace is unlike Grokker (a visual interface tool that is downloadable and used for searching the WWW), Kartoo (a visual meta-search engine for the Internet that builds visual maps of the search results), and similar concept browsing tools including hyperbolic browsers such as XRefer. I will try to explore and articulate the differences shortly. All of these are different types of visual interfaces to view search results or topical organization, i.e., see the related subjects of large information collections. You can read the March 2005 LJ article titled Visualize This that I found at the Grokker site for more information on types of visualization tools. But the conceptual basis for these tools makes a big difference, imo, to their usefulness to end users. As I said when I started this entry, I know of no other that uses a bib. class. scheme and links retrieval to diverse information resources in print and digital formats.
In related matters, there was a self-deposit in DLIST, the open access archive for LIS, about a subject search tool that used the UDC to improve subject searching in the OPAC but, alas, it isn't using a visual interface - http://dlist.sir.arizona.edu/archive/00000799/.
8:58:55 PM 
|
|
