바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

  • P-ISSN1013-0799
  • E-ISSN2586-2073
  • KCI

Article Contents

Prev Next
e-Submission

Vol.27 No.2

Citation Share

Consideration of a Collaborative Based Taxonomy for a Reusable Information Management System

Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management / Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management, (P)1013-0799; (E)2586-2073
2010, v.27 no.2, pp.157-171
https://doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2010.27.2.157


& (2010). Consideration of a Collaborative Based Taxonomy for a Reusable Information Management System. Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management, 27(2), 157-171, https://doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2010.27.2.157

Abstract

This exploratory study outlines the rationalization of why Ontology’s taxonomy requires a strong hierarchy, accuracy, and interoperability in order to be used as a successfully re-useable information management system. Finding the relevant information in a plethora of possible resources by bridging the gap between the user’s needs and the resources of the information technology system is the goal that the information management field should find a way to achieve. This study is based on discussions and interviews with a taxonomist, information architect, and information manager, whose discussions were based on the usability and interoperability of the knowledge based information systems. These professional perspectives are necessary as they are the liaison between users and the information technology group. We found that in order for information managers to ensure successful sharing of knowledge across the end users, a common sense language must be issued in order to achieve reasoning for the artificial intelligence system.

keywords
온톨로지, 텍사노미, 메타데이타, 정보관리, ontology, taxonomy, metadata, information management, ontology, taxonomy, metadata, information management

Reference

1.

Beck, H.. (2008). Evolution of database designs for knowledge management in agriculture and natural resources. http://www.jitag.org/ojs/index.php/jitag/article/view/53/24.

2.

Clarke, D.. (2004). Integrating Taxonomies into Your Infrastructure:iKMS.

3.

Crowston, K.. (1994). A Taxonomy of organizational dependencies and coordination mechanisms. http://ccs.mit.edu/papers/CCSWP174.html#fn0.

4.

Gruber, T. R.. (1993). A translation approach to portable ontology specifications. Knowledge Acquisition, 5(2), 199-220.

5.

Jung, J. J.. (2008). Taxonomy alignment for interoperability between heterogeneous virtual organizations. Expert Systems with Applications: An International Journal, 34(4), 2721-2731.

6.

Lambe, P.. (2007). Organising Knowledge: Taxonomies, Knowledge and Organisational Effectiveness:Chandos Publishing.

7.

Lambe, P.. (2009). Defining taxonomy. http://www.greenchameleon.com/gc/blog_detail/defining_taxonomy.

8.

Malhotra, Y.. (2000). Knowledge management for ebusiness performance: advancing information strategy to ‘internet time’. Information Strategy, The Executive’s Journal, 16(4), 5-16.

9.

Pejtersen, A. M.. (1990). Taxonomy for Cognitive Work Analysis. Riso National Laboratory:Cognitive Systems Group.

10.

Schwartz, K.. (2005). Domain Model Enhanced Search-A Comparison of Taxonomy, Thesaurus, and Ontology:Timo Kouwenhoven, CIBIT Consultants Educators.

Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management

e-Submission OA Policy