Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science (한국문헌정보학회지)

Korean Society For Library And Information Science (한국문헌정보학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Comparative Study of Classification Systems for Organizing a KOS Registry

KOS 레지스트리 구조화를 위한 분류체계 비교 연구

  • Received : 2024.04.26
  • Accepted : 2024.05.12
  • Published : 2024.05.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

To structure the KOS registry, it is necessary to select a classification system that suits the characteristics of the collected KOS. This study aimed to classify domestic KOS collected through various classification schems, and based on these results, provide insights for selecting a classification system when structuring the KOS registry. A total of 313 KOS data collected via web searches were categorized using five types of classification systems and a thesaurus, and the results were analyzed. The analysis indicated that for international linkage of the KOS registry, foreign classification systems should be applied, and for optimization with domestic knowledge resources or to cater to domestic researchers, domestic classification systems need to be applied. Additionally, depending on the field-specific characteristics of the KOS, research area KOS should apply classification systems based on academic disciplines, while public sector KOS should consider classification systems based on government functions. Lastly, it is necessary to strengthen the linkage between domestic and international KOS, which also requires the application of multiple classification systems.

KOS 레지스트리를 구조화하기 위해서는 수집된 KOS의 특성에 맞는 분류체계를 선정해야 한다. 이 연구에서는 다양한 분류체계를 적용하여 수집된 국내 KOS 를 분류하고, 그 결과를 바탕으로 KOS 레지스트리의 구조화를 위한 분류체계를 선정할 때 고려해야 할 시사점을 제공하고자 했다. 웹탐색을 통해 수집된 313개의 KOS 데이터를 대상으로 총 5종의 분류체계와 시소러스를 적용하여 분류하고 그 결과를 분석했다. 분석 결과, KOS 레지스트리의 국제적 연계를 위해서는 국외 분류체계를 적용하고, 국내 지식자원과 연계하거나 국내 연구자들에게 최적화하기 위해서는 국내 분류체계를 적용할 필요가 있었다. 그리고 KOS의 분야별 특성에 따라 연구 분야 KOS는 학문 분야를 기반으로 하는 분류체계를 적용하고, 공공 분야 KOS는 정부 업무기능을 기반으로 하는 분류체계를 적용하는 것을 검토할 필요가 있었다. 마지막으로 국내 KOS와 국제 KOS와의 연계를 강화할 필요가 있었고, 이를 위해서 복수의 분류체계를 적용할 필요가 있었다.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

이 논문 2019년 대한민국 교육부와 한국연구재단의 지원을 받아 수행된 연구임 (NRF-2019S1A5A2A01051524).

References

  1. Construction and management procedures of the Records Management Reference Table(v.2.2). NAK 4:2021(v.2.2). 
  2. Korean Library Association (2013). Korean Decimal Classification. (6th ed.). Seoul: Korean Library Association. 
  3. Ministry of Interior And Safety (2023). Business Reference Model. Public data Portal. Available: https://www.data.go.kr/data/15062615/fileData.do 
  4. National Library of Korea, Sejong (2024). Policy Information Subject Guide. POINT. Available: https://policy.nl.go.kr/pages/information/guide.jsp 
  5. DNB (2024). DDC Browsing (in Katalog Der Deutsche National Bibliothek). Available: https://deweysearchde.pansoft.de/webdeweysearch/mainClasses.html?catalogs=DNB 
  6. EU (2024). EU Vocabularies. Available: https://op.europa.eu/en/web/eu-vocabularies. 
  7. GIL EuroVoc Committee (2024). EuroVoc Handbook. Available: https://op.europa.eu/en/web/eu-vocabularies/dataset/-/resource?uri=http://publications.europa.eu/resource/dataset/eurovoc 
  8. Gnoli, C. (2016). Classifying phenomena, part 1: dimensions. Knowledge Organization, 43(6), 403-415.  https://doi.org/10.5771/0943-7444-2016-6-403
  9. Gnoli, C. (2017a). Classifying phenomena, part 2: types and levels. Knowledge Organization, 44(1), 37-54.  https://doi.org/10.5771/0943-7444-2017-1-37
  10. Gnoli, C. (2017b). Classifying phenomena, part 3: facets. In Dimensions of knowledge: facets for knowledge organization. eds. Richard Smiraglia and Hur-Li Lee. Wurzburg: Ergon, 55-67. 
  11. Gnoli, C. (2018). Classifying phenomena, part 4: themes and rhemes. Knowledge Organization, 45(1), 43-53.  https://doi.org/10.5771/0943-7444-2018-1-43
  12. Gnoli, C. (2020). Introduction to Knowledge Organization. Facet Publishing. 
  13. Gnoli, C. (2023). Integrative Levels Classification (ILC) Project. ISKO Italia. Available: http://www.iskoi.org/ilc/index.php 
  14. Gnoli, C. (2024). Integrative Levels Classification (ILC) People. ISKO Italia. Available: http://www.iskoi.org/ilc/people.php 
  15. Gnoli, C., Smiraglia, R. P., & Szostak, R. (2024). Phenomenon-based classification: An Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (ARIST) paper. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24865. 
  16. Golub, K., Hagelback, J., & Ardo, A. (2018). Automatic classification using DDC on the Swedish Union Catalogue. 18th European Networked Knowledge Organization Systems Workshop, NKOS 2018 In CEUR Workshop Proceedings 2200. 4-16. 
  17. Golub, K., Tudhope, D., Zeng, M. L., & Zumer, M. (2014). Terminology registries for knowledge organization systems. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65, 1901-1916. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23090 
  18. Hjorland, B. (2008). What is knowledge organization (KO)? Knowledge Organization, 35(2/3), 86-102.  https://doi.org/10.5771/0943-7444-2008-2-3-86
  19. Hodge, G. (2000). Systems of knowledge organization for digital libraries: beyond traditional authority files. Washington, DC: Council on Library and Information Resources. Available: http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub91/contents.html 
  20. Information and documentation - Thesauri and interoperability with other vocabularies. Part 2: Interoperability with other vocabularies. ISO 25964-2:2013. 
  21. Kleineberg, M. (2014). Integrative levels of knowing: an organizing principle for the epistemological dimension, in knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. 80-87. Proceedings of the thirteenth international ISKO conference, Krakow, Poland. 
  22. Kleineberg, M. (2021). Integrative levels of knowing: A cognitive-developmental approach to knowledge organization. Dissertation zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades Doctor philosophiae (Dr. phil). Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin (Germany). 
  23. Kyrios, A. & Satija, M. P. (2023). A Handbook of History, Theory and Practice of the Dewey Decimal Classification System. London: Facet Publishing, 
  24. Mazzocchi, F. (2018). Knowledge organization system (KOS). Knowledge Organization, 45(1), 54-78. Also available in ISKO Encyclopedia of Knowledge Organization, eds. Birger Hjorland and Claudio Gnoli, Available: https://www.isko.org/cyclo/kos  https://doi.org/10.5771/0943-7444-2018-1-54
  25. OCLC (2024). WebDewey. Available: https://dewey.org/webdewey 
  26. Park, Z. (2023). Aggregating distributed KOSs: enriching with meta information and linking to the multilingual KOS registry. The Electronic Library, 41(6), 755-769.  https://doi.org/10.1108/EL-06-2023-0168
  27. Soergel, D. (2009). Knowledge organization system development. Bates ELIS Soergel KOS Development. 
  28. Szostak, R. (2024). Additional purposes of knowledge organization, in knowledge organization for resilience in times of crisis: challenges and opportunities. 209-218. Proceedings of the eighteenth international ISKO conference, Wuhan, China. 
  29. VZG (2024). Basic Register of Thesauri, Ontologies & Classifications (BARTOC). Available: https://bartoc.org 
  30. Zeng, M. L. & Zumer, M. (2013a). A metadata application profile for KOS vocabulary registries. ISKO UK biennial conference: Knowledge organization-pushing boundaries, London, UK. 
  31. Zeng, M. L. & Zumer, M. (2013b). Managing and sharing KOS through registries and RDFa/ microdata using a metadata application profile (Based on the paper of the authors presented in ISKO-UK 2013, with updates of the specification). ASIST 2013, Montreal, Canada. 
  32. Zeng, M. L. (2008). Knowledge organization systems (KOS). Knowledge Organization, 35(2/3), 160-182.  https://doi.org/10.5771/0943-7444-2008-2-3-160
  33. Zeng, M. L. (2019). Interoperability. Knowledge Organization, 46(2), 122-146. Also available in Hjorland, Birger and Gnoli, Claudio eds. ISKO Encyclopedia of Knowledge Organization, Available: https://www.isko.org/cyclo/interoperability  https://doi.org/10.5771/0943-7444-2019-2-122