“Data”: The data

Abstract

While many scholars in information science have understandably focused on the concept of “information” as foundational, some authors have identified other concepts as having similarly foundational status. Two that are regularly suggested as candidates are “data” and “document.” Oddly, perhaps, for such a basic term, “data” has not been as frequently subject to probing analysis in the scholarly literature as “information”; and although “document” has long been a term of special interest to historians of the European documentation movement, some of whom continue to develop a document theory, there is little consensus on the precise nature of the conceptual relationship between “data” and “document.” In this paper, a review is conducted of historical interpretations of “data,” and relationships with contemporary conceptions of “document” are explored. The conclusion is reached that, current practice notwithstanding, it is not in fact the case that documents are made up of data, nor that the document is a species of dataset: rather it is the other way round, in both respects. A dataset is made up of documents; and the dataset is a species of document.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ackoff, R. L. (1989). From data to wisdom. Journal of Applied Systems Analysis, 16, 3–9.Google Scholar
  2. Bailey, N. (1721). An universal etymological English dictionary. London, England: Printed for E. Bell et al.Google Scholar
  3. Balbus, J. (1971). Catholicon. Farnborough, England: Gregg. [Facsimile reprint of the 1st printed ed. (1460) of the thirteenth-century text, printed in Mainz. See http://lcweb2.loc.gov/service/rbc/rbc0001/2012/2012rosen0031/2012rosen0031.pdf for a digitized copy.]
  4. *Batten, Sir W. (1630). A most plaine and easie way for the finding of the sunnes amplitude and azimuth, and thereby the variation of the compasse, by logarithme. N.p.: E. Allde for J. Tapp.Google Scholar
  5. Borgman, C. L. (2007). Scholarship in the digital age: Information, infrastructure, and the Internet. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  6. Borgman, C. L. (2014). Big data, little data, no data: Scholarship in the networked world. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  7. *Boughen, E. (1650). Master Geree’s Case of Conscience Sifted. London, England.Google Scholar
  8. Buckland, M. K. (1991). Information as thing. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42(5), 351–360.Google Scholar
  9. Buckland, M. K. (1997). What is a “document”? Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 48(9), 804–809.Google Scholar
  10. Capurro, R., & Hjørland, B. (2003). The concept of information. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 37, 343–411.Google Scholar
  11. †‡Chambers, E. (1728). Cyclopædia: or, An universal dictionary of arts and sciences. London, England: Printed for J. & J. Knapton et al.Google Scholar
  12. Checkland, P. (1999). Systems thinking. In W. Currie & B. Galliers (Eds.), Rethinking management information systems: An interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 45–56). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Coombs, J. H., Renear, A. H., & DeRose, S. J. (1987). Markup systems and the future of scholarly text processing. Communications of the ACM, 30(11), 933–947.Google Scholar
  14. Day, R. E. (2001). The modern invention of information: Discourse, history, and power. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
  15. DeRose, S. J., Durand, D. G., Mylonas, E., & Renear, A.H. (1990). What is text, really? Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 1(2), 3–26.Google Scholar
  16. *Donne, J. (1649). Fifty sermons. London, England: Printed by J. Flesher for M. F. et al.Google Scholar
  17. Drucker, J. (2011). Humanities approaches to graphical display. Digital Humanities Quarterly, 5(1). http://www.digitalhumanities.org/dhq/vol/5/1/000091/000091.html
  18. Eliot, T. S. (1934). The rock. New York, NY: Harcourt, Brace.Google Scholar
  19. ¶Encyclopædia Britannica: or, A dictionary of arts and sciences, compiled upon a new plan. (1771). Edinburgh: Printed for A. Bell and C. Macfarquhar.Google Scholar
  20. *Euclid. (1661). Euclid’s Elements of geometry: … Likewise Euclid’s Data. J. Leeke & G. Serle (Eds.). London, England: Printed by R. & W. Leybourn for R. Tomlins.Google Scholar
  21. Ferraris, M. (2013). Documentality: Why it is necessary to leave traces. Bronx, NY: Fordham University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Floridi, L. (2008). Data. In W. A. Darity, Jr. (Ed.), International encyclopedia of the social sciences (2nd ed., vol. 2, pp. 234–237). Detroit, MI: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  23. Frické, M. (2009). The knowledge pyramid: A critique of the DIKW hierarchy. Journal of Information Science, 35(2), 131–142.Google Scholar
  24. Frohmann, B. (2004). Deflating information: From science studies to documentation. Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  25. Furner, J. (2004). Information studies without information. Library Trends, 52(3), 427–446.Google Scholar
  26. Furner, J. (2014). Information without information studies. In F. Ibekwe-SanJuan and T. M. Dousa (Eds.), Theories of information, communication and knowledge (pp. 143–179). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer Science+Business Media.Google Scholar
  27. Gitelman, L. (Ed.). (2013). “Raw data” is an oxymoron. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  28. Gitelman, L. (2014). Paper knowledge: Toward a media history of documents. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Glare, P. G. W. (Ed.). (2012). Oxford Latin dictionary (2nd ed.). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  30. *Hammond, H. (1647). A copy of some papers past at Oxford, betwixt the author of the Practicall catechisme, and Mr. Ch. London, England: Printed by R. Cotes for R. Royston.Google Scholar
  31. *Hammond, H. (1648). A brief vindication of three passages in the Practical catechisme. London, England: Printed for R. Royston.Google Scholar
  32. ‡Harris, J. (1704). Lexicon technicum: or, An universal English dictionary of arts and sciences. London, England: Printed for D. Brown et al.Google Scholar
  33. Helmholtz, H. von. (1977). Epistemological writings: The Paul Hertz / Moritz Schlick centenary edition of 1921. R. S. Cohen & Y. Elkana (Eds.). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
  34. Hortus vocabulorum, 1500. (1968). R. C. Alston (Ed.). Menston, England: Scolar. [Facsimile reprint of the 1st ed. (1500) printed by W. de Worde, London.]Google Scholar
  35. ∫Huntsman, J. F. (1973). “Pepys MS 2002’ Medulla grammatice: An edition.” PhD diss. ProQuest (7326020).Google Scholar
  36. IFLA Study Group on the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records. (1998). Functional requirements for bibliographic records: Final report. Munich, Germany: K. G. Saur.Google Scholar
  37. †‡Johnson, S. (1755). A dictionary of the English language. London, England: Printed by W. Strahan, for J. & P. Knapton et al.Google Scholar
  38. Kent, W. (1978). Data and reality: Basic assumptions in data processing reconsidered. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: North-Holland.Google Scholar
  39. Latham, R. E. (1986). Dictionary of medieval Latin from British sources (vol. 1: A–L, fasc. 3). London, England: British Academy / Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Lund, N. W. (2009). Document theory. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 43, 1–55.Google Scholar
  41. Markham, A. N. (2013). Undermining “data”: A critical examination of a core term in scientific inquiry. First Monday, 18(10). http://firstmonday.org/article/view/4868/3749
  42. †Martin, B. (1749). Lingua Britannica reformata: or, A new English dictionary. London, England: Printed for J. Hodges et al.Google Scholar
  43. Michell, J. (1986). Measurement scales and statistics: A clash of paradigms. Psychological Bulletin, 100(3), 398–407.Google Scholar
  44. *Moxon, J. (1679). Mathematicks made easie: or, A mathematical dictionary. London, England: Printed for J. Moxon.Google Scholar
  45. Newman, E. B. (1974). On the origin of “scales of measurement.” In H. R. Moskowitz, B. Scharf, & J. C. Stevens (Eds.), Sensation and measurement (pp. 137–145). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
  46. †Ogilvie, J. (1882). The imperial dictionary of the English language: A complete encyclopedic lexicon, literary, scientific, and technological (new ed.). C. Annandale (Ed.). London, England: Blackie.Google Scholar
  47. Renear, A. H. (2004). Text encoding. In S. Schreibman, R. Siemens, & J. Unsworth (Eds.), A companion to digital humanities (pp. 218–239). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  48. Renear, A. H., Sacchi, S., & Wickett, K. M. (2010). Definitions of dataset in the scientific and technical literature. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 47. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/meet.14504701240/full
  49. Renear, A. H., Mylonas, E., & Durand, D. G. (1996). Refining our notion of what text really is: The problem of overlapping hierarchies. In S. Hockey & N. Ide (Eds.), Research in humanities computing 4: Selected papers from the ALLC/ACH Conference, Christ Church, Oxford, April 1992 (pp. 263–280). Oxford, England: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  50. Renear, A. H., & Wickett, K. M. (2010). There are no documents. In Proceedings of Balisage: The Markup Conference 2010. http://www.balisage.net/Proceedings/vol5/print/Renear01/BalisageVol5-Renear01.html
  51. Riles, A. (Ed.). (2006). Documents: Artifacts of modern knowledge. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  52. Rosenberg, D. (2013). Data before the fact. In L. Gitelman (Ed.), “Raw data” is an oxymoron (pp. 15–40). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  53. Rowley, J. (2007). The wisdom hierarchy: Representations of the DIKW hierarchy. Journal of Information Science, 33(2), 163–180.Google Scholar
  54. Russell, B. (1903). The principles of mathematics. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Sacchi, S., Wickett, K. M., Renear, A. H., & Dubin, D. (2011). A framework for applying the concept of significant properties to datasets. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 48. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/meet.2011.14504801148/full
  56. Simpson, J. (Ed.). (2000–). Oxford English dictionary (3rd ed.). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. http://www.oed.com/
  57. Simsion, G. C. (2007). Data modeling: Theory and practice. Denville, NJ: Technics Publications.Google Scholar
  58. Smith, B. (2014). Document acts. In A. Konzelmann Ziv & H. B. Schmid (Eds.), Institutions, emotions, and group agents: Contributions to social ontology (pp. 19–31). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer Science+Business Media.Google Scholar
  59. Stevens, S. S. (1946). On the theory of scales of measurement. Science, 103(2684), 677–680.Google Scholar
  60. Thomas, T. (1972). Dictionarium linguae Latinae et Anglicanae, 1587. R. C. Alston (Ed.). Menston, England: Scolar. [Facsimile reprint of the 1st ed. (1587) published by the author in Cambridge.]Google Scholar
  61. Thow-Yick, L. (1994). The basic entity model: A fundamental theoretical model of information and information processing. Information Processing & Management, 30(5), 647–661.Google Scholar
  62. ∫Tremblay, F. A. (1968). “The Latin–Middle English glossary ‘Medulla grammatice,’ B. M. Harl. MS 1738.” PhD diss., Catholic University of America. ProQuest (6912308).Google Scholar
  63. *Tuke, T. (1614). Nevv essayes: meditations, and vowes. London, England: Printed by N. Okes.Google Scholar
  64. *Urquhart, T. (1645). The trissotetras: or, A most exquisite table for resolving all manner of triangles. London, England: Printed by I. Young.Google Scholar
  65. ∫Van Zandt-McCleary, J. M. (1958). “The Medulla grammatice Latin–English dictionary: A diplomatic transcription.” PhD diss., University of Chicago. ProQuest (T-04429).Google Scholar
  66. †Webster, N. (1828). An American dictionary of the English language. New York, NY: S. Converse.Google Scholar
  67. Wickett, K. M., Sacchi, S., Dubin, D., & Renear, A. H. (2012). Identifying content and levels of representation in scientific data. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 49. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/meet.14504901199/full
  68. †Worcester, J. E. (1860). A dictionary of the English language. Boston, MA: Swan, Brewer & Tileston.Google Scholar
  69. Zeleny, M. (1987). Management support systems: Towards integrated knowledge management. Human Systems Management, 7(1), 59–70.Google Scholar

Electronic versions of some of the works listed may be found according to the following key:

  1. *Early English Books Online. Google Scholar

¶Eighteenth Century Collections Online.

†HathiTrust Digital Library.

‡The Making of the Modern World.

∫ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Los AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations