Web 2.0 and Active/Passive Input for Knowledge Systems
Todays’ Loose Wire (WSJ, Jeremy Wagstaff) raises issues of the value of “tagging.” This Web 2.0 process of labeling things (bookmarks, files, calendar entries etc.) is an “Active” form of input into the vast knowledge management system that is the web. However, as John Sawyer and I note in our article “Supporting technologies and organizational practices for the transfer of knowledge in virtual environments,” active systems aren’t likely to hold up — systems are much more likely to work if the input is passive — done automatically as part of the regular work. Question is whether we are wrong if you are dealing with all the people who participate in the web?
Tools that support a “passive” approach:
2 Responses
February 19th, 2007 at 6:55 pm
Welcome to the Blogosphere!
Yes, you can footnote and reference on the web quite easily. However, I bet that if you keep at this on a regular basis, some of your referencing will diappear. The Search Function gets better by the day. If I’m referencing, say, The Social Life of Information, why should I waste the time of noting the date, publisher, and (I love this one) location of the publisher. As if publishers still have but one location….
jay
February 21st, 2007 at 8:27 am
How right you are! By #3 I’d figured out that the link was enough. I do still like to see Author & Year to give me some context.