User:Simon/Annotation typologies: Difference between revisions

From XPUB & Lens-Based wiki
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 4: Line 4:


ACCIDENTAL DOG-EAR<br>
ACCIDENTAL DOG-EAR<br>
[[|500px|frameless]]
[[500px|frameless]]
ANNOTATION<br>
ANNOTATION<br>
ASTERISK<br>
ASTERISK<br>

Revision as of 09:57, 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
frameless ANNOTATION
ASTERISK
BOOK PRICE
BOOKMARK
CIRCLED TEXT
CREASED PAGE
CROSS
DEAD ANT
DOG-EAR
ERASER RUBBING
ERRATA
FINGERPRINT
FOLD
HANDWRITTEN LETTER
INK BLOT
LIBRARY DOCUMENT
LIFTED PRINT
LINE
LOOSE PAGE
NOTEPAPER BOOKMARK
NOTES
PAGES REMOVED
POST-IT NOTE
RECEIPT BOOKMARK
REPLACED IMAGE
SCUFF
SMUDGE
SQUIGGLE
STAIN
STRIKETHROUGH
TICK
TORN PAGE
TORN PAPER BOOKMARK
UNDERLINING
WARPED PAGE
WEAR AND TEAR

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.