Surely the general concept of an EDRMS embodies the ideas you are
thinking about. It should be looked on as a large bucket of "stuff".
Each thing has a number of metadata tags. The "stuff" can then be
ordered (searched) in multiple ways by choosing different sequences of
metadata tags.

Donald

-----Original Message-----
From: The UK Records Management mailing list
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Paul Dodgson
Sent: 06 September 2006 08:50
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Definition of Classification


Stuart

Very interesting.

This brings me to another issue.

I have been musing about the proper use of metadata.  If one uses
metadata in accordance with acknowledged standards and applies the likes
of subject based metadata accurately (I am thinking here about the IPSV
v2) will we find ourselves in an environment when search engines become
sufficiently well designed to render classification by traditional
(hierarchical means) redundant?  I think so and believe we are not too
far away.  The argument against is the need to use a consistent
framework to ensure that the customer gets what they want irrespective
of source, and we all know how well we communicate!

I am of the opinion that traditional classification is now time limited
and we will not need to group things systematically save in a virtual
environment.  I would be interested to learn more about developing such
a virtual environment.

Views/argument much appreciated.


Paul

-----Original Message-----
From: The UK Records Management mailing list
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stuart Orr
Sent: 06 September 2006 07:59
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Definition of Classification

Paul
I used to work in the Old Bailey and your question about classification
reminds me of those lawyers that insisted a witness replied either Yes
or No to a question that could not be answered so simply. I therefore do
not think my response will win your lollipop.

Classification is simply grouping things systematically.  The latter
element is the bit that is usually missing in records management
classifications I have seen. Aristotle talked about classes or
categories:
"...a category was like [a] container with things either inside or
outside the container...the properties the things inside the container
had in common were what defined the category" (Taylor. 'The organisation
of information').  Bowker & Starr talking about classification in its
broadest sense described it as "...a set of boxes (metaphorical or
literal)
into which things can be put to do some kind of work - bureaucratic or
knowledge production...".

Various people of the past twenty years have suggested that records
managers have misunderstood and misused the term classification and I
think that was right and is still in part right. Much older US and UK
literature seems  to have used the word to describe filing order.

Two of the classic principles of classification are firstly that each
scheme (or at least each level in a hierarchical scheme) should be based
on a single classificatory principle, such as classification by size,
and secondly that the classes should be mutually exclusive. These
elements are frequently missing and the schemes fail to add value.

Stuart Orr

_______________________________________________________________________
Leicestershire County Council - rated a  'four-star' council by the
Audit Commission
_______________________________________________________________________


This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential. If you
are not the intended recipient, any reading, printing, storage,
disclosure, copying or any other action taken in respect of this e-mail
is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended
recipient, please notify the sender immediately by using the reply
function and then permanently delete what you have received.

Incoming and outgoing e-mail messages are routinely monitored for
compliance with Leicestershire County Council's policy on the use of
electronic communications.   The contents of e-mails may have to be
disclosed to a request under the Data Protection Act 1998 and the
Freedom of Information Act 2000.

The views expressed by the author may not necessarily reflect the views
or policies of the Leicestershire County Council.

Attachments to e-mail messages may contain viruses that may damage your
system. Whilst Leicestershire County Council has taken every reasonable
precaution to minimise this risk, we cannot accept any liability for any
damage which you sustain as a result of these factors. You are advised
to carry out your own virus checks before opening any attachment.



The information in this email is solely for the intended recipients. 
If you are not an intended recipient, you must not disclose, copy, or 
distribute its contents or use them in any way: please advise the 
sender immediately and delete this email.

Perth & Kinross Council does not warrant that this email or any 
attachments are virus-free and does not accept any liability for any 
loss or damage resulting from any virus infection. Perth & Kinross 
Council may monitor or examine any emails received by its email 
system.

The information contained in this email may not be the views of Perth 
& Kinross Council. It is possible for email to be falsified and the 
sender cannot be held responsible for the integrity of the 
information 
contained in it.

Requests to Perth & Kinross Council under the Freedom of Information 
(Scotland) Act should be directed to the Freedom of Information Team -
 
email: [log in to unmask]