Culture Classification: An Analysis

12
Culture Classification: An analysis Kai Li

description

This is the second assignment of IST616 in iSchool Syracuse in Fall 2012. The requirement of this assignment is to analysis an classification. And the classification scheme I chose was Culture Classification designed by Virtual Terrain Project: http://vterrain.org/Culture/culture_class.html

Transcript of Culture Classification: An Analysis

Page 1: Culture Classification: An Analysis

Culture Classification:An analysis

Kai Li

Page 2: Culture Classification: An Analysis

Culture Classification

• URL: http://vterrain.org/Culture/culture_class.html

• Designed by Virtual Terrain Project (VTP)• Date: Draft was published in 2002

Page 3: Culture Classification: An Analysis

Domain and Scope

• It is "a complete list of terms which give useful information about the visual appearance of a man-made object on the terrain".– Inductive classification scheme

• Unit: the concept of man-made objects

Page 4: Culture Classification: An Analysis

Domain and Scope (2)

• Specifications:– "objects over a certain size: roughly human-scale

and larger"– "objects which are typically found "outdoors"– "placed upon the terrain, not modifications to the

terrain itself"

Page 5: Culture Classification: An Analysis

Purpose

• One of the purposes of this classification may be to establish a domain map to share with other communities the descriptions of artifacts.– A number of schemata are referenced and

discussed in this classification scheme– Mapping and linking, especially used by Internet

community, will be an increasingly important function of library classification in the future

Page 6: Culture Classification: An Analysis

Structure

• Hierarchical structure. • Structure of the classification:– stationary objects

• apartment building• building• ……• windmotor, wind turbine, wind generator

– mobile objects• amphibious vehicle• ……• space vehicle

Page 7: Culture Classification: An Analysis

Structure (2)

• Structure of the classification:– stationary objects• building

– power plant» subtype necessary to implicate appearance, examples:

nuclear power plant……– religious building

» subtype necessary to implicate appearance, examples: eastern orthodox church

– ……

Page 8: Culture Classification: An Analysis

Structure (3)

• “Is-a” relationship between levels; parallel relationship between terms in the same level.– Terms arranged alphabetically

• “Appearance of the objects” is the only facet in the classification based on the guiding principles:– However, “these may be based on appearance

(visual form), on use, or several other criteria”. (http://vterrain.org/Culture/BldCity/)

Page 9: Culture Classification: An Analysis

Evaluation

• “The hierarchy used here is entirely arbitrary and subjective.”– “Human language concepts are imprecise”– “Categorization is never a simple directed graph”

• Languages:– “How to handle synonyms”– Bias toward American English

Page 10: Culture Classification: An Analysis

Evaluation (2)

• Appearance may not be the best criterion to classify buildings.– Buildings with different functions may or may not

have different appearances• This classification is too simple compared with

the objects it aims to describe.– Inconsistencies in terms of how deep a category

should be divided

Page 11: Culture Classification: An Analysis

Reference

• Virtual Terrain Project. (n.d.). Culture Classification. Retrieved October 16, 2012, from http://vterrain.org/Culture/culture_class.html

Page 12: Culture Classification: An Analysis

Thanks!