i202 Fall 2010 School of Information, UC Berkeley

Pursuant to this morning's discussion about knowledge and who owns it, I think you might find this case particularly interesting: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_v._Papermaster. Yes, it's a Wikipedia link, but I wrote it as an assignment for Brian Carver's IP Law for the Info Industries class last year, so you can trust it. I wrote Papermaster's Wikipedia page too, which will give you a little more background.

Here's the current intro to chapter 9, all about the Mütter Museum and its very strange collections. If you're ever in Philly and have the chance to go, totally do it, it's amazing.

The IFLA includes the abstraction hierarchy in its Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records in order to assist in cataloging entities. The abstraction itself is a way to define and distinguish between different types of entities in a library system.

As with just about everything for which one would create an ontology, the beer ontology could have been done a few different ways, but I actually think having fermentation style on the first level works well and seems logical (to me, anyway, as someone who has a few batches of homebrew under my belt). However, there are a few picky points of contention. "Bitter" doesn't really belong in its own alongside those styles because a bitter beer is usually a heavily hopped pale ale, and since you include pale ale as its own term, then bitter could spring from that.