science and web 2.0: social bookmarking (may 2006)
DESCRIPTION
Part of a talk series at embl in 2006 about web 2.0 for science. (TRANSCRIPT
Social bookmarking
EMBL Centre for Computational Biology
30th of May, 2006Michael Kuhn
briefly: my motivation
one year of social
bookmarking
before: over 100 bookmarks in browser
now: only 11 (my toolbar)
over 300 links in
del.icio.us, organized with
tags
conceptsexamples
science 2.0references
remember the Yahoo! catalog?
bookmarks: a similar hierarchy
taxonomy
taxonomyfolk
s
tags
a tag is a keyword you
assign intuitively
Hierarchy Tags
Eukaryota Metazoa Chordata Craniata Vertebrata Euteleostomi Mammalia … Hominidae Homo
homoprimateeukaryotevertebratemammal
ComparisonHierarchy Tags
fixed framework, created
beforehand
dynamic and created on the
spot
logical description
intuitive description
only one categorycan have many
tags
filing is slow tagging is fast
conceptsexamples
science 2.0references
analyze tags and cluster
them
social bookmarking in
academia
keywords are already there!
keywords are not in PubMed
instead:Medical Subject Headings
(MeSH terms)
let readers describe the paper: tagging
managing your references:how does it
work?
CiteULike
Nature Publishing Group
one-man project
links and papers/books
mainly papers/books
partially imports bibliographic data
fully imports bibliographic
data
can keep posts private (optional:
until date)
all posts are public
API to access the data from other
tools no API yet
supports tag intersections
no tag intersections, but can store
PDFs
there are many social bookmarking
sites
social bookmarking
and collaboration
summary of this section
Social bookmarking:… helps you to manage and
organize your references… lets you follow the
references of people you know or trust
… generates recommendations of interesting references for you (but don’t expect wonders yet)
conceptsexamples
science 2.0references
you gain: a fast way to
store and retrieve
information
you get: assistance in finding new
papers
you profit:from the insight of other people
you give: your
bibliography (your selection
of publicly available
information)
conflict between advancing
knowledge and advancing your
career
possible disadvantage:
another scientist
discovers an article earlier
(or at all)
possible disadvantage:someone might
deduce what you are working on
you have to decide if you
want to contribute
(but I think it is worth it)
(also, you can keep your bookmarks
private for some time in Connotea)
take-home message
With social bookmarking …
… you can better keep track of your links and references
… you implicitly share knowledge with other scientists
Next Tuesday:
Stop emailing huge files: How to
jointly edit manuscripts and share data
conceptsexamples
science 2.0references
About social bookmarking:
A two-part review and introduction: http://www.dlib.org/dlib/april05/hammond/04hammond.html and http://www.dlib.org/dlib/april05/lund/04lund.html
Wikipedia articles: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_bookmarking, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tags, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folksonomy
Scientific social bookmarking:
CiteULike: http://www.citeulike.org/
Connotea: http://www.connotea.org/
General social bookmarking services:
del.icio.us: http://del.icio.us
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/
(plus many others)
Other links:
NCBI taxonomy: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=Taxonomy
Medical Subject Headings: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/