n this article we look at what makes folksonomies work. We agree with the premise that tags are no replacement for formal systems, but we see this as being the core quality that makes folksonomy tagging so useful. We begin by looking at the issue of "sloppy tags", a problem to which critics of folksonomies are keen to allude, and ask if there are ways the folksonomy community could offset such problems and create systems that are conducive to searching, sorting and classifying. We then go on to question this "tidying up" approach and its underlying assumptions, highlighting issues surrounding removal of low-quality, redundant or nonsense metadata, and the potential risks of tidying too neatly and thereby losing the very openness that has made folksonomies so popular.
%0 Journal Article
%1 citeulike:468899
%A Guy, Marieke
%A Tonkin, Emma
%D 2006
%J D-Lib Magazine
%K 2006 folksonomy tagging tags
%N 1
%T Folksonomies: Tidying up Tags?
%U http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january06/guy/01guy.html
%V 12
%X n this article we look at what makes folksonomies work. We agree with the premise that tags are no replacement for formal systems, but we see this as being the core quality that makes folksonomy tagging so useful. We begin by looking at the issue of "sloppy tags", a problem to which critics of folksonomies are keen to allude, and ask if there are ways the folksonomy community could offset such problems and create systems that are conducive to searching, sorting and classifying. We then go on to question this "tidying up" approach and its underlying assumptions, highlighting issues surrounding removal of low-quality, redundant or nonsense metadata, and the potential risks of tidying too neatly and thereby losing the very openness that has made folksonomies so popular.
@article{citeulike:468899,
abstract = {n this article we look at what makes folksonomies work. We agree with the premise that tags are no replacement for formal systems, but we see this as being the core quality that makes folksonomy tagging so useful. We begin by looking at the issue of "sloppy tags", a problem to which critics of folksonomies are keen to allude, and ask if there are ways the folksonomy community could offset such problems and create systems that are conducive to searching, sorting and classifying. We then go on to question this "tidying up" approach and its underlying assumptions, highlighting issues surrounding removal of low-quality, redundant or nonsense metadata, and the potential risks of tidying too neatly and thereby losing the very openness that has made folksonomies so popular.},
added-at = {2010-10-14T13:27:35.000+0200},
author = {Guy, Marieke and Tonkin, Emma},
biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/26277281dd632380aa7c6412680773119/philonous},
citeulike-article-id = {468899},
citeulike-linkout-0 = {http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january06/guy/01guy.html},
interhash = {535e0aea1bcbd7feb85a7495f284a589},
intrahash = {6277281dd632380aa7c6412680773119},
journal = {D-Lib Magazine},
keywords = {2006 folksonomy tagging tags},
month = {January},
number = 1,
posted-at = {2007-10-22 14:09:30},
priority = {3},
timestamp = {2010-10-14T13:27:35.000+0200},
title = {Folksonomies: Tidying up Tags?},
url = {http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january06/guy/01guy.html},
volume = 12,
year = 2006
}