Taxonomy Sessions at the 2019 SLA Conference

SLA (Special Libraries Association) offered a good number of taxonomy-related sessions at this year’s annual conference, held June 14-18 in Cleveland, Ohio, thanks to the organizing efforts of its Taxonomy Division. There were enough taxonomy sessions so that there was always at least one session of interest at any time.

SLA is a membership association of librarians and information professionals, particularly involved in “special” libraries or information services. Special libraries include corporate, specialized academic, government, military, law, medical, business, and nonprofit. I’m not a librarian (I’m an accidental taxonomist), so I didn't become a member of this professional organization until a Taxonomy Division was created 10 years ago. I’ve attended and presented at some, but not all of the SLA conferences in the past 10 years, as the taxonomy-related offerings vary, and presentation topics are usually the choice of the Taxonomy Division conference planning committee. This year, for the first time, I presented not one, but two sessions: the full-day preconference “continuing education” workshop and co-presented a session on taxonomy management software.

I was very pleased that there was such a rich program in other taxonomy sessions this year, especially compared to last year, thanks to Taxonomy Division conference program chair Janice Keeler and program committee members Edee Edwards and Margaret Nunez. There were also two sessions on knowledge management, which I found very interesting. The taxonomy-related sessions were:

• "Introduction to Taxonomy Design & Creation" (full-day preconference workshop)
• "Ensuring Semantic Interoperability and Creating Interoperable Taxonomies" (90 minutes, 2 speakers)
• "Taxonomy Governance in Real Life" (90 minutes, panel discussion, 2 speakers and moderator)
• "Taxonomy Roundtable” (90 minutes, three roundtables of participant discussions)
• "Big Data and Controlled Vocabularies (30 minutes, 2 speakers)
• "Taxonomy Basics" (30 Minutes)
• "Keeping your Taxonomy Fresh and Relevant" (60 minutes, 2 speakers)
• "Taxonomy-Ontology Conversions: Case Studies (75 minutes, 3 speakers)
• "Taxonomy Tools and Tool Evaluation" (60 minutes, 2 speakers)

“Ensuring Semantic Interoperability & Creating Interoperable Taxonomies,” was a densely packed presentation covering the different types and issues in controlled vocabulary interoperability with two presenters in turn: Margie Hlava, President and Chairman, Access Innovations Inc., and Marcia Zeng, Professor of Library and Information Science, Kent State University. Marcia explained that interoperability is at different levels: system level, semantic level, and structural level, and her focus was on semantic interoperability, which is addressed in the international standard ISO 25964-2. She discussed in detail each of the different kinds controlled vocabulary interoperability. There are methods that are based on working from an existing knowledge organization system: derivation from an original source and expansion; and there are methods that involve working between/among existing vocabularies: integration/combination and interoperation/shared/harmonization.

“Taxonomy Governance in Real Life” featured two panelists of very different organizations: Paula McCoy, manager from ProQuest, and Susannah Woodbury, taxonomist from Overstock. Taxonomy governance was defined as maintaining the content of a controlled vocabulary (adds/deletes), maintaining the integrity of a vocabulary (standards and usage), and implementing a vocabulary (managing those who work in and use the vocabulary). Topics of discussion included working with stakeholders, the governance of change and how decisions are made, and staying flexible through the iterative process.

The “Taxonomy Roundtable” was a purely discussion-based session, whereby attendees divided into three groups of about 6-7, and each group got to discuss three of the four predefined topics in turn: taxonomy ROI, adding taxonomy to the workflow, implementing taxonomies in search, and taxonomies in user interface design. These topics were chosen based on a Taxonomy Division survey of members’ interests. Each table then reported the outcomes of their discussions to the larger group.

“Big Data and Controlled Vocabularies” was presented by Camille Matthew, Information Science Specialist, NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Camille explained what big data is: an accumulation of data that is too large and complex for processing by traditional database management tools. Big data is big by 5 Vs: volume, velocity, variety, veracity (varied dates/outdated for example), and value. The issue is combining “stuff” (big data) and “strategy.” Strategies include controlled vocabulary, taxonomy, ontology, and metadata standards. Data structure cannot be assumed, so we design for unstructured content.

"Taxonomy Basics" was presented by Heather Kotula, Vice President of Marketing and Communications, Access Innovations Inc. This quick session was aimed at those new to taxonomies. It comprised definitions of taxonomies and other types of controlled vocabularies and also included quite a bit of history into the field of classification and naming.

“Keeping your Taxonomy Fresh and Relevant: The APA Thesaurus” was presented by Marisa Hughes, Taxonomist, American Psychological Association (APA). Marisa had recently led a thorough thesaurus update that took about a year and was completed in February 2019, and this presentation was largely based on lessons learned from that project. Change management is a key part of in taxonomy governance. Change is constant. Creating a responsive and relevant taxonomy involves a set of activities: adapt, determine, engage, delineate, data, identify. One needs to know when and why to change, and a roadmap is also needed.

 “Taxonomy-Ontology Conversions: Case Studies” comprised three case-study presenters: Edee Edwards, Ontology Architect at the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA); Mary Chitty, Library Director & Taxonomist at Cambridge HealthTech; and David Bender, Manager, Medical Ontology, Radiological Society of North America. The genesis of this session came out of a conversation at the SLA conference the previous year, when someone from Lexis Nexis asked you build your ontologies: from taxonomies or from data. It was anticipated that the case studies would be all be conversions from taxonomies to ontologies, but that was not necessarily so.

Edee Edwards explained that the NFPA was building a data science team, which was very interested in ontologies. There was also a data governance group involved. At that time, they also needed a system upgrade of vocabulary software, and the new one is SKOS-based. They did a proof of concept with our data science group. NFPA’s primary use for the ontology was auto-tagging.  

Mary Chitty's presentation “Preparing your taxonomy to be ready for data scientists & machine readability " presented the case of taxonomies at Cambridge HealthTech. It is still a taxonomy, not an ontology, but Cambridge HealthTech has recently partnered with OntoForce, a semantic search and data science company to use their search engine. The presentation was more about the issues than any solution. Ongoing challenges include dealing with legacy data, integrating acquired companies’ data, scaling up, and dealing with ambiguity.

David Bender’s presentation “The Big Maybe: Should You Convert Your Taxonomy to an Ontology?” presented the example of the controlled vocabulary of the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA), RadLex. RadLex, a model of anatomical procedure and modality as it pertains to radiology, is referred to as a lexicon or terminology, although it is arranged as a hierarchical tree/taxonomy. It was decided to have a structure, as an ontology, but there are still more questions than answers. In moving in the direction of ontology, they are using the tool Protégé and have converted RadLex into an OWL form, but otherwise it is still kept as a taxonomy.

I presented the full-day preconference workshop "Introduction to Taxonomy Design & Creation"  and on taxonomy management software in the session "Taxonomy Tools and Tool Evaluation, and my co-presenter Marti Heyman of OCLC presented on how to evaluate taxonomy tools.  

SLA Taxonomy Division members can read detailed reports of each of these taxonomy sessions in the next issue of the Division’s “Taxonomy Times” newsletter.

SLA, an international organization, holds its annual conference in June in different cities in North America. It will next be in Charlotte, North Carolina, June 6-9, 2020.

Taxonomy: A Profession, Not an Industry

I am looking forward to attending and presenting at my 8th Taxonomy Boot Camp conference next week. What makes this conference special is that it is very much both a professional and a commercial/industry conference, whereas most conferences tend to be one or the other. In other words, it is a commercial conference that serves a profession.

A professional conference is one that is usually organized by a nonprofit professional organization/society for its members for furthering the intellectual exchange in the field and otherwise serving the needs of its members. Professional conferences at which I have presented include those of SLA (Special Libraries Association) and the American Society for Indexing. A commercial conference, on the other hand, is one put on by a company (in publishing, advertising, research, consulting, or pure event management) to bring together clients and vendors in specialty area and promote business for all. Commercial conferences at which I have presented, in addition to those associated with KM World, include the Gilbane conference, Henry Stewart DAM, and Text Analytics World. Professional conferences do have vendor exhibits, too, but more as an aside to help finance the conference, and these exhibits can be very small. Commercial conferences do, of course, have informative and educational sessions, but the conference is organized with the primary purpose of earning a profit from selling exhibit space and registrations.

Commercial conferences are often based on an industry, with industry loosely defined as companies that sell related products or services for a defined market and thus potentially could be exhibiters. This “industry” could be as specialized as knowledge management, content management, or digital asset management. Taxonomy, however, is not an industry.

Taxonomy is a profession and is also an information management tool/technique. Sometimes an industry and a profession are almost the same, such as in medicine and law. Closer to the world of taxonomies are the industry/professions of software development, consulting, and librarianship. Taxonomy work comes closest to the latter, and many taxonomists were originally trained as librarians. So, if libraries are both an industry and a profession, then some might make the assumption that taxonomy is also both an industry and a profession.

To determine if there is an industry associated with a profession, to look at trade show/exhibit vendors at a conference or look for advertisement-supported trade journals. Taxonomy Boot Camp has a mini exhibit of usually half a dozen sponsors, in contrast with the co-located KM World conference showcase of over 30 sponsors. Indeed, commercial software vendors of pure taxonomy management tools (not a feature of a larger solution) can be counted on one hand. Taxonomy-related services, namely those of consultants, are also a significant business, but this cannot be considered its own “industry.” That is because any consulting firm (larger than a sole proprietorship) that consults on taxonomy also consults in other, related areas, such as knowledge management, data management, user experience design, content integration, etc. As for trade journals, there are none dedicated to taxonomy, simply because there are not enough companies that would advertise in this niche space. Libraries, on the other hand, do have lots of vendors, which exhibit at conferences, and there are also library trade journals.

Taxonomists work in all industries. I have worked in full-time permanent positions as a taxonomist in industries including publishing, software, consulting, and renewable energy, and have provided taxonomy consulting services to many more industries: financial services, retail, hospitality, biomedical research, manufacturing, and education. Despite my various industries of my employment, I have always applied the broad “Information services” or “Information technology and services” as my “industry” in my LinkedIn profile. For this reason, trying to analyze the industries used in taxonomist LinkedIn profiles might not be accurate or useful, due to the preference of those two industry designations. Nevertheless, I have found taxonomists in LinkedIn to use the following additional industries:

Libraries
Internet
Publishing
Research
Online Media
Higher Education
Computer Software
Public Relations & Communications
Marketing & Advertising
Management Consulting
Entertainment
Pharmaceuticals
Hospital & Health Care
Oil & energy

Indeed the Taxonomy Boot Camp conference has attendees from all of these varied industries, but all with a shared professional interest in taxonomies. That’s what makes this conference feel more like a professional conference. But unlike a professional conference (such as SLA for librarians, of which I am not, so I always feel like an outsider there) , you don’t have to be a member of an organization or professional taxonomist, just interested in taxonomies as a tool/technique. As such, the conference is both highly educational/informative, yet welcoming and open to all.

Mentoring Taxonomist Program

In my last blog post, I discussed the need for mentoring taxonomists and mentioned that I had volunteered to lead the new mentoring committee of the Taxonomy Division of SLA (Special Libraries Association) and establish its mentoring program (http://taxonomy.sla.org/get-involved/mentor). While some of the mentoring activities are available to members only, other mentoring services can involve anyone, so I will describe them here.

Frequently Asked Question Resources

In many cases, those new to taxonomies simply have questions about the taxonomy field. Therefore, the initial and primary activity of the SLA Taxonomy Division’s Mentoring Committee has been to develop a detailed list of Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) and answers, which total 35 to date.

The issue as to whether the answers should be a service to Taxonomy Division members only or to public was resolved by having short answers of 1-3 sentences for the public, and longer answers of 150 – 250 words on separate web pages accessible to members only with their login. (Members also have the ability to submit additional questions to the FAQs.) The FAQs with the short answers are available under the Mentoring section of the public website: http://taxonomy.sla.org/get-involved/mentor/taxonomy-faqs

Mentor and Protégé Directories

Connecting aspiring taxonomists (whom we are calling protégés) with experienced taxonomists, who volunteer to be mentors, is another objective. While it is neither practical nor feasible for the Taxonomy Division to provide direct individual mentoring services nor match mentors to protégés, it can act as a clearinghouse in providing directories on its web site of both willing mentors and interested protégés. In the past few months, I have set up both a Mentor Directory and a Protégé Directory, and it is not required that people be listed in one directory in order to contact those listed in the other directory.

Mentor Directory

Access to mentors is, as expected, a membership benefit. Thus, the Mentor directory is accessible by membership login only. Mentors are SLA Taxonomy Division members with considerable experience in some aspect of taxonomies and are willing to volunteer limited time in mentoring for the benefit of their professional growth and prestige. Mentors listed in the Mentor Directory:

• should be available for answering specific individual questions about the taxonomy field, education/training, and job prospects, which the general FAQs cannot answer.
• probably could help out a protégé who brings his/her own project
• most likely do not have projects to offer in an internship type of relationships (but might)

Protégé Directory

Taxonomy Division members who have had at least some training or exposure to taxonomies and would like to gain the benefits of mentoring may list their names in the Protégé Directory, which is displayed on the website:
http://taxonomy.sla.org/get-involved/mentor/directory-of-proteges

Protégés seeking a mentoring relationship could be for taxonomy projects in either of the following two scenarios:

1. The protégé is looking for a temporary internship or training arrangement, expecting lower than average pay or no pay in exchange for (1) the opportunity to work without prior experience, (2) useful feedback from the supervisor-mentor, and (3) the ability to use the supervisor-mentor as a future work reference.
2. The protégé has a pending or existing taxonomy project (whether at work, a freelance project, or a volunteer project) and is seeking advice on aspects of the taxonomy design and/or feedback on initial taxonomy work.

Responses to either of these two kinds of mentoring possibilities are still expected to be relatively low, so the Taxonomy Division is permitting nonmembers who can mentor to contact listed protégés. In the case of the first scenario in particular, many qualified taxonomists who are willing to mentor, simply don’t have suitable projects or company legal permission to bring on temporary interns or subcontractors at below-market rates. Non-profit organizations, though, are more likely to have arrangements for volunteers.

Therefore, if you are looking for a taxonomist intern whom you are willing to mentor, check out the Protégé Directory. If you are looking to be mentored, then join SLA and its Taxonomy Division and list yourself in the directory.