Search

Hjorland contends that in order to further the goal of linking researchers to relevant information 'domain analysis' should be used in concept classification. He thinks that concept classification should not strive to classify on the basis of the properties of objects, but rather on descriptions of objects that are loosely derived from human activity and social negotiation. Currently, most information scientists operate under a 'positivist' view of concept classification, which, Hjorland maintains, mistakenly strives for universal classification schema while muddling the comprehension of individual researchers. Though he tends to include Wittgenstein in the positivist camp for classification, Hjorland's domain analysis is strongly Wittgensteinian. This work seeks to support the philosophical underpinnings of domain analysis through Wittgenstein's theory of language. Additionally, we outline Rick Szostak's criticism of domain analysis. While he levies an important charge against Hjorland, his solution proves inadequate in light of Wittgenstein's theory of language. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article informs on the role of disciplinary repositories and the inherent contradiction of a form of open access that is dependent on the continued existence of traditional subscription models. It mentions about developing appropriate genres of scholarly communication for the digital environment. It also informs on adoption of the technical infrastructure of repositories and complementary education and training surrounding authors' rights, and intellectual property in online environments.

An introduction is presented in which the editors discuss various reports within the issue on topics including the challenges of new article-level metrics and author copyrights facing the traditional journal, the inclusion of Altmetrics as an additional and complementary component of scholarly impact metric components, and the issue of author copyrights within a changing open access settings.