User:Simon/Annotation typologies: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
http://simonbrowne.biz/projects/from-the-books-slv-rbrr-000-099/ | http://simonbrowne.biz/projects/from-the-books-slv-rbrr-000-099/ | ||
ACCIDENTAL DOG-EAR | ACCIDENTAL DOG-EAR | ||
[[500px]] | [[500px]] | ||
ANNOTATION<br> | ANNOTATION<br> |
Revision as of 09:59, 1 June 2019
Typologies identified from a previous project, which explored "marks of use" in books from a section of the State Library of Victoria.
http://simonbrowne.biz/projects/from-the-books-slv-rbrr-000-099/
ACCIDENTAL DOG-EAR
500px
ANNOTATION
500px
ASTERISK
500px
BOOK PRICE
500px
BOOKMARK
500px
CIRCLED TEXT
500px
CREASED PAGE
500px
CROSS
DEAD ANT
500px
DOG-EAR
500px
ERASER RUBBING
500px
ERRATA
500px
FINGERPRINT
500px
FOLD
500px
HANDWRITTEN LETTER
500px
INK BLOT
500px
LIBRARY DOCUMENT
500px
LIFTED PRINT
500px
LINE
500px
LOOSE PAGE
500px
NOTEPAPER BOOKMARK
500px
NOTES
500px
PAGES REMOVED
500px
POST-IT NOTE
500px
RECEIPT BOOKMARK
500px
REPLACED IMAGE
500px
SCUFF
500px
SMUDGE
500px
SQUIGGLE
500px
STAIN
500px
STRIKETHROUGH
500px
TICK
500px
TORN PAGE
500px
TORN PAPER BOOKMARK
500px
UNDERLINING
500px
WARPED PAGE
500px
WEAR AND TEAR
500px
These formed a loose classification system that indexed these books not by bibliographic reference, but by the frequency of occurrence, taking a "bag of words" approach.
Problems that arose were linguistic - it was difficult assigning a word to an example as this already had some assumption of intention (e.g. a doodle as an intentional drawing vs squiggle as unintentional drawing).
thoughts and reflections
Whereas my previous approach was one of identification based on nouns, which presented problems. In a sense, to name something is to own it. Things become property much more easily than actions. Perhaps a different approach of identifying actions may be more open and associative than a noun-based classification scheme.