Another cavilling datum: let's not forget French: des informations, une donnée, des données. Since we are sailing in rather murky waters, let's keep in mind that we are perforce using specialized vocabulary. Explaining the nuances in what we write is a major part of our job.
Bernhard, I always enjoy your posts.
Hunter
L. Hunter Kevil, Ph.D.
Collection Development Librarian
University of Missouri Libraries
573-884-8760
kevill_at_missouri.edu
-----Original Message-----
From: Next generation catalogs for libraries [mailto:NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of B.G. Sloan
Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 9:41 AM
To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] Knowledge vs. Information [was: Problems With Selection in Today's Information World]
Bernhard Eversberg said:
"...the view of information as a process is not only the original (ancient) one, it is in keeping with the fact that "information" has no plural whereas "data", as well as "news", has no singular."
Maybe it's my five years of heavy-duty Latin studies in the seminary, but isn't "datum" the singular form of "data"? :-)
Bernie Sloan
--- On Fri, 7/2/10, Bernhard Eversberg <ev_at_BIBLIO.TU-BS.DE> wrote:
From: Bernhard Eversberg <ev_at_BIBLIO.TU-BS.DE>
Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] Knowledge vs. Information [was: Problems With Selection in Today's Information World]
To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Date: Friday, July 2, 2010, 2:28 AM
B.G. Sloan wrote:
>
> I mostly agree with the points that Stephen McDonald makes, but
> couldn't one also make the case that most of the information in
> libraries is *recorded* knowledge?
>
Rather, records *resulting from* knowledge. The knowledge itself remains
in the head of the person doing the recording. Out of one body of
individual knowledge, myriads different records can emerge, every one
and even the sum of them always incomplete. Knowledge, essentially,
cannot be mapped 1:1 on paper or into files. And always, it is part of a
much larger context that does not get recorded with it but is
essential for the records to be meaningful. So, *recorded knowledge*
is shorthand, but with the potential to mislead.
Records are data, not information. We should get away from using
the two as synonyms. The same data that informs one person can be
meaningless for the next.
Information is what *happens*, it is a process, when a person reads the
data. That person has to be able to read, to decipher the script and to
understand the language and the wording of the text, and then some
grasp of the original context as well, no small prerequisites! As long
as this doesn't happen, there's only data with a *potential* to
inform.
Libraries have always helped people with the process of informing
themselves, they are not dispensing information, let alone knowledge,
but data. They can empower people in the process of doing useful
things with data, the process eventually resulting in some knowledge,
always in a new and different and individual context.
Besides, the view of information as a process is not only the original
(ancient) one, it is in keeping with the fact that "information" has no
plural whereas "data", as well as "news", has no singular.
B.Eversberg
Received on Fri Jul 02 2010 - 10:53:45 EDT