1. FSR, 17-18 Feb 2014, Rome Which knowledge organization systems for conceptual interoperability? Claudio Gnoli ISKO Italy

2. Convergence L ibraries (IFLA) A rchives (ICA, IASA) M useums (ICOM) + Galleries Zoological gardens Botanical gardens Websites All store and give access to etc.documents (information resources) [University of Virginia Art Museum on Vimeo]

3. Convergence Encouraged by the digital formats [Rayward as early as 1998] Ideally, people should input a single search and be able to navigate between digital documents (or digital representations of material documents) irrespective of their nature, source and institution

4. Convergence...but is all this real ??

5. Interoperability The Internet, XML-RDF, linked data are boosting technical interoperability. What about conceptual interoperability?

6. Interoperability 590 Animaux Technically but not conceptually interoperable metadata Several barriers implied here...

7. Potential information sources Example: “where can I find information on badgers in Tuscany?”

8. Potential information sources Well, in books...

9. … in adademic papers... Potential information sources

10. ...in local museums... Potential information sources [Wikimedia]

11. ...in zoological gardens Potential information sources [dailymash.co.uk]

12. Potential information sources (sometimes with Twitter output)...

13. … or even in churches Potential information sources fresco in the abbey of Monte Oliveto Maggiore (Tuscany)

14. All these sources can provide some relevant information (e.g., that there were tame badgers in 16 th c. Tuscany) So where is their union catalogue ?... Potential information sources

15. KOS The only bridge to retrieve different information sources on a same subject are knowledge organization systems (KOS)

16. KOS The notion of KOS is useful as it includes tools developed in different communities:  keywords and tags  terminologies  taxonomies  subject heading lists} controlled  thesauri} vocabularies s.s.  classification schemes  ontologies ... Different features but common basic principles

17. Knowledge Organization (KO) A term in use since the 1970s [Dahlberg] with precursors [Bliss 1929] includes “subject indexing”, “classification”, “categorization”, “book indexing”, “taxonomies”, “system of the sciences”...

18. Limits to interoperability Acknowledging the common notion of KOS is a first step. However, there are many different KOSs and KOS types which limits conceptual interoperability in several ways: (1) language (2) disciplines (3) representation (4) alignment

19. All verbal KOSs are only useful to speakers of their language. en:badger fr: blaireau it: tasso de: Dachs ru: yazvik zh: 獾亚科 Limits to interoperability. 1: Language

20. We need multilingual verbal KOSs (e.g. MACS) or classification systems based on notation (e.g. UDC) Limits to interoperability. 1

21. Limits to interoperability. 2: Disciplines Library classifications are based on disciplines, while taxonomies or thesauri are not. Please, are you husbandry, or zoology, or entertainment ?... Well, I'm a badger...

22. Limits to interoperability. 2: Disciplines The León Manifesto recommends that KOSs distinguish phenomena from disciplines and carriers and allow to search independently for each, e.g.: horses in military science horses in husbandry badgers in husbandry badgers in comics badgers in frescos

23. Limits to interoperability. 3: Representation Markup formats don't always represent all features of a KOS. E.g., full faceted structures cannot be represented in MARC (based on non-faceted DDC and LCC), nor in SKOS (based on thesauri) [Gnoli et al. 2011]. skos:facetOf skos:category

24. Limits to interoperability. 3: Representation Most CMSs for the Web don't manage systematic sorting through a notation. OWL allows for any relationship [Zeng et al. 2010], but is mostly used for hierarchical ones until now...

25. Limits to interoperability. 4: Alignment Every KOS organizes knowledge in its own way. Mapping is not always obvious: Aubergines =EQ Egg-plants Horticulture ~EQ Gardening Inland waterways EQ Rivers|Canals [Dextre Clarke 2011 on ISO 25964]

26. Limits to interoperability. 4: Alignment According to domain analytical theory [Hjørland], KOSs may be incommensurable. Others are more optimistic [Szostak] : circumlocutions always helped translation and trade Fuzzy relationships as in ISO 25964 may be a solution. Still, mapping is costly... [sheppardsoftware.com]

27. KOSs should be interoperable as for: (1) language: (2) disciplines studiedBy (3) representation Publish (your KOS in LOD) or perish (4) alignmentInvest in mapping Recommendations

28. – Use KOSs! (Any is better than none.) - Use interoperable KOSs!

29. claudio.gnoli@unipv.it @scritur Thanks for your attention!