[博碩論文] 應用知識組織系統原理在數位典藏系統之建置：以臺灣原住民族影音與照片資料為例

臺灣大學／圖書資訊學研究所／100／博士
研究生:洪淑芬
指導教授:陳雪華

摘要：
本論文是知識組織系統相關理論的應用研究；旨在研究如何有效地建構一個具有完善的導引檢索功能的臺灣原住民族照片與影音數位典藏資料庫系統。本論文的基本理念是，透過探析不同的資訊資源之間的「關係」，將之應用在基礎metadata資料的建置與資訊檢索系統的建置上，則可以將原本各自獨立而分散不相關聯的各種資源，妥適地加以整合；讓資源與資源之間發揮互補的功能，而可以建置一個知識性豐富的臺灣原住民族影音與照片數位典藏資料庫系統。
為了印證透過「關係」的應用，將「關係」的效用充分加以發揮利用，即可建構理想的整合性、導引性等優點兼具的瀏覽查詢系統，本論文主要包含三大部分的研究：文獻探討、現況分析、以及實作實驗。文獻探討旨在萃取圖書館學中與資料庫建置相關的核心理論之概念，包括探討傳統的資訊組織方式、以及圖書館學對於如何有效地幫助使用者查詢的資訊／知識組織之相關理論與方法，以支援本論文所要進行的系統開發研究。在背景探討方面，針對該領域具有代表性的入口網站所提供的臺灣原住民族相關數位典藏資料庫、以及臺灣原住民族知識性的網路資源，進行分析調查。前項調查的目的是為發掘問題以及了解現在此類資料庫系統現有功能之水準。後者有關臺灣原住民族的網路資源調查目的則是為了找尋可資利用的知識性資源。然後在透過文獻探討所建構的理論基礎與現況調查心得的啟示下，構思本研究將開發的系統功能目標，亦即以資訊組織完善、具有導引功能而且易用性佳等為主要考量。
本研究在開發臺灣原住民族影音與照片資料庫的過程中，為達成所設定的資料庫系統目標，除了為metadata中相關的必要欄位建置充足正確的資料之外，尚進一步歸納出可以根據資料的metadata以及權威性的知識性網路資源產出具有「關係」意義的各種索引與知識庫。但是，要於眾多關鍵性的欄位中，正確地鍵入資料，容易發生人為的錯誤，而且甚費時間與人力。本研究透過所主張的「關係」之應用，不但實現多欄位的自動建檔，而且透過階層化的主題索引、地名索引、人名索引等，成功地為可互補的不同資料群以及知識庫之間，建立橫向關聯。
在建置完成資料庫之後，本研究透過檢索服務面、技術實務面、使用者實測面等多重面向的評量方式，討論本研究的成效。在檢索服務面的效益評估方面，一一檢視本研究的成果資料庫功能，以確認此資料庫系統已達成本研究設定的系統功能目標；包括可以主動事前提供與資料庫內容具有相關性的雙語化的「知識地圖」與各種索引資訊、確實達成「文獻保證」與「使用者保證」、因為完整地完成索引工作而使任何一筆數位典藏資料均可能透過「知識地圖」之索引詞彙而被尋獲、查詢者可由多面向探索資料庫內容並可能盡搜資料庫內的典藏、可以關聯知識、可以導航延伸查詢與擴展檢索範圍、以及適合觸控式資訊器材之環境使用等。在技術實務面的效益評估方面，則分析進一步將網路資源編目提升為將網路資源整理為「知識庫」的好處、以及本研究提出的自動建檔方法的具體效益。在透過使用者實測進行評估方面，本研究製作簡潔的使用說明，測試使用者透過該使用說明，獨立學習使用資料庫的效果、以及其對於本資料庫提供的各種功能之評價，以了解本研究開發的資料庫系統所能夠得到的使用者滿意度。此一評估結果一方面提供本研究針對成果資料庫再進行改善之外，亦有助於確認本研究基於落實圖書館學在資訊檢索方面的核心理論所開發之資料庫系統的易用性與可用性。
本研究之結論是，本論文所提出的應用「關係」進行知識性數位典藏資料庫建置之模式，是以資料主題內容為依歸的深度的、具有邏輯性的不同資料庫之間、以及資料庫與相關網路上的知識資源之間的關聯方法，具有可行性、應用簡易度、實用性等；是可以讓所有資料庫內的數位典藏資源均得以透過「知識地圖」或索引而被簡便地檢索、讓查詢者可以檢索到確實所需資料，而且能夠關聯到有用的知識資源的方法，故可以使查詢結果富含知識性，而可裨益研究、教育與文化保存。


參考文獻：
Anonymous. (1937). La terminologie de la documentation. Cooperation Intellectuelle, 77, 228-240.
Anonymous. (December 20, 2010). 維基百科：Apache tomcat. Retrieved June 10, 2011, from http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_Tomcat
Anonymous. (January 21, 2011). 維基百科：Apache. Retrieved June 10, 2011, from http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache
Anonymous. (May 10, 2011). 維基百科：MySQL. Retrieved June 10, 2011, from http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/MySQL
Banville, C., & Landry, M. (1989). Can the field of MIS be disciplined? Communications of the ACM, January,48-60.
Baskerville, R. L., & Myers, M. D. (2002). Information systems as a reference discipline. MIS Quarterly, 26(1), 1-14.
Bean, C. A., & Green, R. (2001). Introduction. In C. A. Bean, & R. Green (Eds.), Relationships in the organization of knowledge (pp. [vii]-ix). Dordrecht, Boston, Lindon: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
── (2001b). Relevance relationships. In C. A. Bean, & R. Green (Eds.), Relationships in the organization of knowledge (pp. 115-132). Dordrecht, Boston, Lindon: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Beghtol, C. (2001). Relationships in classificatory structure and meaning. In C. A. Bean, & R. Green (Eds.), Relationships in the organization of knowledge (pp. 99-113). Dordrecht, Boston, Lindon: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
── (2003). Classification for information retrieval and classification for knowledge discovery: Relationships between “professional” and “naïve” classifications. Knowledge Organization, 30(2), 64-73.
── (2004). Naïve classification systems and the global information society. In I. C. McIlwaine (Ed.), Knowledge Organization and the Global Information Society: Proceedings of the Eighth International ISKO Conference 13-16 July 2004 (pp. 19-22). Würzburg: Ergon Verlag.
Binding, C., & Tudhope, D. (2004). Integrating faceted structure into the search process. In I. C. McIlwaine (Ed.), Knowledge Organization and the Global Information Society: Proceedings of the Eighth International ISKO Conference 13-16 July 2004 (pp. 67-72). Würzburg: Ergon Verlag.
Blake, S. P. (1978). Managing for responsive research and development. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman and Company.
Bodenreider, O., & Bean, C. A. (2001). Relationships among knowledge structures: Vocabulary integration within a subject domain. In C. A. Bean, & R. Green (Eds.), Relationships in the organization of knowledge (pp. 81-98). Dordrecht, Boston, Lindon: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Briet, S. (1951). Qu’est-ce que la documentation. Paris: EDIT.
Chan, L. M. (1995). Library of Congress Subject Headings: Principles and application, 3rd ed. Englewood, Colo.: Library Unlimited.
── (2000, December 19). Exploiting LCSH, LCC, and DDC to retrieve networked resources: Issues and challenges. Retrieved May 7, 2011, from http://www.loc.
gov/catdir/bibcontrol/chan_paper.html
Cleverdon, C. W. (1967). The Cranfield tests on index language devices. Aslib Proceedings, 19(6), 173-194.
Cleverdon, C. W., Mills, J., & Keen, E. M. (1966). Factors determining the performance of indexing systems (Volume 1: Design; Volume 2: Results). Cranfield, UK: Aslib Cranfield Research Project, College of Aeronautics.
Coates, E. J. (1960). Subject catalogues: Headings and structure. London: The Library Association.
Cutter, C. A. (1876). Rules for a printed dictionary catalogue. Washington: Govt. print, off.
Dainty, A. (2008). Methodological pluralism in construction management research. In A. Knight, & L. Ruddock (Eds.), Advanced research methods in the built environment (pp. 1-13). New York: Wiley-Blackwell.
Davenport, T. H., & Prusak, L. (1998). Working knowledge : How organizations manage what they know. Boston, Mass: Harvard Business School Press.
Dextre Clarke, S. G. (2001). Thesaural relationships. In C. A. Bean, & R. Green (Eds.), Relationships in the organization of knowledge (pp. 37-52). Dordrecht, Boston, Lindon: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
DCMI Usage Board. (2010). DCMI metadata terms: A complete historical record. Retrieved May 20, 2012, from http://dublincore.org/usage/terms/history/
#coverageT-001
Dublin Core Metadata Initiative. (2006). Dublin Core Metadata Element Set, Version 1.1: Reference description. Retrieved from http://dublincore.org/documents/
2006/12/18/dces/.
── (2008). Dublin Core Metadata Element Set, Version 1.1: The elements (Date Issued: 2008-01-14) Retrieved from http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/
Dubois, C. P. R. (August 1987). Free text versus controlled vocabulary: A reassessment. Online Review, 11(10), 243-253.
Gonga, Y., Zhanga, T., et al. (2004). Design and development of a search interface for an information gathering tool. In M. Fieschi et al. (Eds.), MEDINFO 2004 (pp. 1471-1475). Amsterdam: IOS.
El-Hoshy, L. M. (2001). Relationships in Library of Congress Subject Headings. In C. A. Bean, & R. Green (Eds.), Relationships in the organization of knowledge (pp. 135-152). Dordrecht, Boston, Lindon: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Green, R. (2001). Relationships in the organization of knowledge: An overview. In C. A. Bean, & R. Green (Eds.), Relationships in the organization of knowledge (pp. 3-18). Dordrecht; Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Gull, C. D. (1987a). Historical note: Information science and technology: From coordinate indexing to the global brain. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 38(5), 338-366.
── (1987b). Information science and technology: From coordinate indexing to the global brain, Appendix A. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 38(5), 362-365.
Harriss, C. (1998). Why research without theory is not research: A reply to Seymour, Crook and Rooke. Construction Management and Economics, 16(1), 113-116.
Hjorland, B., & Nicolaisen, J. (2004). Scientific and scholarly classifications are not “naïve”: A comment to Begthol (2003). Knowledge Organization, 31(1), 55-61.
Howarth, L. C. (2004). Modelling a natural language gateway to metadata-enabled resources. In I. C. McIlwaine (Ed.), Knowledge Organization and the Global Information Society: Proceedings of the Eighth International ISKO Conference 13-16 July 2004 (pp. 61-66). Würzburg: Ergon Verlag.
Hudon, M. (2001). Relationships in multilingual thesauri. In C. A. Bean, & R. Green (Eds.), Relationships in the organization of knowledge (pp. 67-80). Dordrecht, Boston, Lindon: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Hunter, E. (2000). Do we still need classification? In R. Marcella, & A. Maltby (Eds.), The future of classification (pp. 1-17). Hampshire: Gower.
Kilgour, F. G. (1997). Origins of coordinate searching. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 48(4), 340-348.
Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. [Chicago]: University of Chicago Press.
Lakatos, I. (1968). Criticism and the methodology of scientific research programmes. Paper presented at the Meeting of the Aristotelian Society.
── (1970a). Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmes. In J. Worrall, & G. Currie (Eds.), The methodology of scientific research programmes: Imre Lakatos philosophical papers: Volume 1 (pp. 8-101). Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press (electronic version).
── (1970b). Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmes. In I. Lakatos, & A. Musgrave (Eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge (pp. 91-124). Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press (electronic version).
Library of Congress. (n.d.). When to establish a new heading (3.2 References, H 187). LCSH: structure & application. Retrieved from http://www.itsmarc.com/crs/
shed0177.htm
López-Huertas, M. J., & Torres, I. (2004). Terminological representation of specialized areas in conceptual structures: The case of gender studies. In I. C. McIlwaine (Ed.), Knowledge Organization and the Global Information Society: Proceedings of the Eighth International ISKO Conference 13-16 July 2004 (pp. 35-39). Würzburg: Ergon Verlag.
Maedche, A., Staab, S., Studer, R., Sure, Y., & Volz, R. (2002). SEAL— tying up information integration and web site management by ontologies. In Proceedings of the NSF-EU workshop on database and information systems research for semantic Web and enterprises (pp. 95-107). Amicalola Falls and State Park, Georgia.
Markey, K. (1984). Subject searching in library catalogs. Dublin, Ohio: OCLC.
Miksa, F. L. (1977). Charles Ammi Cutter: Library systematizer. In F. Miksa (Ed.), Charles Ammi Cutter: Library systematizer (pp. 19-76). Littleton, Colo.: Libraries Unlimited.
── (1983). The subject in the dictionary catalog from Cutter to the present. Chicago: American Library Association.
── (1992). The concept of the universe of knowledge and the purpose of LIS classification. In N. J. Williamson, & M. Hudon (Eds.), Classification research for knowledge representation and organization (pp. 101-126). New York: Elsevier Science Pub.
Miksa, F. L., & Dewey, M. (1986). Melvil Dewey: The professional educator and his heirs. Library Trends, 34(3), 359-381.
Milstead, J. L. (2001). Standards for relationships between subject indexing terms. In C. A. Bean, & R. Green (Eds.), Relationships in the organization of knowledge (pp. 53-66). Dordrecht, Boston, Lindon: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Mitchell, J. S. (2001). Relationships in the Dewey Decimal Classification System. In C. A. Bean, & R. Green (Eds.), Relationships in the organization of knowledge (pp. 211-226). Dordrecht, Boston, Lindon: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Molholt, P. (2001). The art and architecture thesaurus: Controlling relationships through rules and structure. In C. A. Bean, & R. Green (Eds.), Relationships in the organization of knowledge (pp. 153-170). Dordrecht, Boston, Lindon: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Mondofacto: Online Medical Dictionary. (2003). [definition for] Topic map. Retrieved from http://www.mondofacto.com/facts/dictionary?topic+map
Nambisan, S. (2003). Information systems as a reference discipline for new product development. MIS Quarterly, 27(1), 1-18.
Neelameghan, A. (2001). Lateral relationships in multicultural, multilingual databases in the spiritual and religious domains: The OM information service. In C. A. Bean, & R. Green (Eds.), Relationships in the organization of knowledge (pp. 185-198). Dordrecht, Boston, Lindon: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Nelson, S. J., Johnston, W. D., & Humphreys, B. L. (2001). Relationships in Medical Subject Headings (MeSH). In C. A. Bean, & R. Green (Eds.), Relationships in the organization of knowledge (pp. 171-184). Dordrecht, Boston, Lindon: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Nunamaker Jr., J. F., Chen, M., & Purdin, T. C. M. (1991). Systems development in information systems research. Journal of Management Information Systems, 7(3), 89-106.
O''Keefe, D. J. (2004). Cultural literacy in a global information society- specific language: An exploratory ontological analysis utilizing comparative taxonomy. In I. C. McIlwaine (Ed.), Knowledge Organization and the Global Information Society: Proceedings of the Eighth International ISKO Conference 13-16 July 2004 (pp. 55-59). Würzburg: Ergon Verlag.
Orlikowski, W., & Gash, D. (1994). Technology frames: Making sense of information technology in organization. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 12(2), 174-207.
Orlikowski, W., & Iacono, C. S. (2001). Research commentary: Desperately seeking the “IT” in IT research -- A call to theorizing the IT artifact. Information Systems Research, 12(2), 121-134.
Orlikowski, W. J. (1992). The duality of technology: Rethinking the concept of technology in organization. Organization Science, 3(3), 398-427.
Orlikowski, W. J., & Baroudi, J. J. (1991). Studying information technology organizations: Research approaches and assumptions. Information Systems Research, 1-28.
Owrang, M. M., & Grupe, F. H. (1996). Using domain knowledge to guide database knowledge discovery. Expert Systems with Application, 10(2), 173-180.
Panas, A., & Pantouvakis, J. P. ( 2010). Evaluating research methodology in construction productivity studies. The Built & Human Environment Review, 3(Special Issue 1), 63-85.
Popper, K. R. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. New York: Basic Books.
Rampur, S. (n. d.). Formative evaluation vs summative evaluation. Retrieved from http://www.buzzle.com/articles/formative-evaluation-vs- summative-
evaluation.html
Rodriguez, R. D. (1984). Hulme’s concept of literary warrant. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 5(1), 17-26.
Satija, M. P. (2001). Relationships in Ranganathan’s Colon Classification. In C. A. Bean, & R. Green (Eds.), Relationships in the organization of knowledge (pp. 199-210). Dordrecht, Boston, Lindon: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Smith, S. E. (1993). On the shoulders of giants: From Boole to Shannon to Taube: The origins and development of computerized information from the mid-nineteenth century to the present. Information Technology and Libraries, 12(2), 217-226.
Sokal, R. R. (1974). Classification: Purposes, principles, progress, prospects. Science, 185(4157), 1115-1123.
Stone, A. T. (Ed.). (2000). The LCSH century: One hundred years with the Library of Congress Subject Headings system. New York: Haworth Information Press.
Sure, Y., & Studer, R. (2002). On-to-knowledge: Content-driven knowledge management tools through evolving ontologies (Methodology -- Final Version). Institute AIFB, University of Karlsruhe.
── (2004). A methodology for ontology-based knowledge management. In J. Davies, D. Fensel, & F. V. Harmelen (Eds.), Towards the semantic web: Ontology-driven knowledge management (pp. 33-46). London: John Wiley & Sons.
Svenonius, E. (2000). Bibliographic objectives. The intellectual foundation of information organization (pp. 15-51). Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Tillett, B. (2004). What is FRBR? A conceptual model for the bibliographic universe. Retrieved from http://www.loc.gov/cds/FRBR.html.
── (2001). Bibliographic relationships. In C. A. Bean, & R. Green (Eds.), Relationships in the organization of knowledge (pp. 19-35). Dordrecht, Boston, Lindon: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Trueswell, R. (1969). Some behavioral patterns of library users: The 80/20 rule. Wilson Library Bulletin, 43(5), 458-461.
Vizine-Goetz, D. (1997). From book classification to knowledge organization: Improving Internet resource description and discovery. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 24(1), 24-27.
Wikipedia. (13 April 2011 at 15:54.). Standing on the shoulders of giants. Retrieved May 22, 2011, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_on_the_shoulders_
of_giants
Wilson, P. (1968a). Introduction. Two kinds of power: An essay on bibliographical control, California Library reprint series edition, 1978 ed. (pp. 1-5). Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.
── (1968b). Describing and exploiting. Two Kinds of Power: An Essay on Bibliographical Control, California Library reprint series edition, 1978 ed. (pp. 20-40). Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.
Wilson, T. D. (2002). The nonsense of ‘knowledge management’. Information Research, 8(1), paper no. 144. Retrieved from http://InformationR.net/ir/8-1/paper144.html
中文主題詞表編訂小組編訂（民94 a）。中文主題詞表修訂版=List of Chinese subject terms。網址：http://catweb.ncl.edu.tw/sect-2.htm
──（民94 b）。中文主題詞表 2005年修訂版 = List of Chinese subject terms。臺北市：國家圖書館。
中央研究院數位典藏國家型科技計畫後設資料工作組、國立台灣師範大學圖書資訊學研究所研譯（2007）。CNS國家標準草案：都柏林核心集（經濟部標準檢驗局96年度委辦計畫 -- 規劃與建置數位內容與數位生活應用之技術標準環境 (案號：1D15960125-20)）。[臺北市]：經濟部標準檢驗局。網址：http://metadata.teldap.tw/project/filebox/BSMI/DC.pdf
朱雅琦（2009）。臺灣原住民族知識組織架構之建構方法研究──以阿美族物質文化為例 = The research on the method of constructing Taiwan''s aboriginal knowledge organization structure: Ami Tribe''s material culture as an example。未出版之碩士論文，國立臺灣大學圖書資訊學研究所，臺北市。
汪明輝（2007）。創造原住民族的數位空間領域：一個批判性民族論觀點。在 行政院原住民族委員會主辦、國立臺灣大學圖書館臺灣原住民族圖書資訊中心編，從數位典藏到數位學習──臺灣原住民族的文化傳承學術研討會論文集。臺北市：編者。
林珊如、戈立秀（民96）。從文化保存到教育學習──故宮博物院器物典藏資料檢索系統使用者需求與使用研究 = User and use study of National Palace Museum Antiquities Digital Archives Retrieval System。國家圖書館館刊，96(1)，41-86。
林福岳（2009）。原住民族知識體系中傳播研究的可能脈絡。臺灣原住民研究論叢，(5)，55-98。
洪淑芬、項潔（民96年，5月）。特藏圖書資料之「創生性典藏」與其主題分類：以臺灣原住民照片為例 = On new incarnation of special collections and their subject classification: With the NTUL indigenous Taiwanese photographs collection as an example。在 行政院原住民族委員會主辦、國立臺灣大學圖書館臺灣原住民族圖書資訊中心編，從數位典藏到數位學習──臺灣原住民族的文化傳承學術研討會論文集。臺北市：編者。
國立中央圖書館編目組編訂（民84）。中文圖書標題表 = Chinese Subject Headings（修訂版）。臺北市：中央圖書館。
國立臺灣大學圖書館（n.d.）。行政院原住民族委員會臺灣原住民族資訊資源網。網址：http://www.tipp.org.tw/formosan/search/search.jspx
國家文化資料庫知識管理系統（n. d. a）。詮釋資料格式：古文書（1.4 版）。Retrieved February 19, 2005, from http://km.cca.gov.tw/
國家文化資料庫知識管理系統（n. d. b）。詮釋資料格式：影音作品。Retrieved February 19, 2005, from http://km.cca.gov.tw/
陳光華（民90）。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告：資訊檢索中索引典系統建置之研究。國立臺灣大學圖書資訊學系暨研究所。
──（民93）。資訊檢索之績效評估。2004年現代資訊組織與檢索研討會論文集，125-139。
──（民93）。自然語言處理與圖書資訊學。中華民國計算語言學學會通訊ACLCLP, 5(3)，16-20。Retrieved from http://www.aclclp.org.tw/doc/15-3.pdf
──（民96）。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告：資訊檢索評估中檢索問題特性之探究。國立臺灣大學圖書資訊學系暨研究所。
陳亞寧、陳淑君（民90）。以知識探索為本之知識組織方法論及研究分析 = An analytical review of current methodologies of knowledge organization: A knowledge discovery approach。圖書與資訊學刊，(39)，36-51。
──（民91）。檔案後設資料應用發展之研析 = An analytical review of metadata standards and practices in archives community。國家圖書館館刊，91(1)，29-57。
陳亞寧、陳淑君、江惠英、唐其慶（民88年）。數位圖書博物館的資訊基礎建設──中央研究院metadata的規劃設計與實施 = Metadata practice for the digital library -- A view from Academia Sinica。圖書館學與資訊科學，25(2)，71-90。
陳明君（民88）。檢索背景與檢索問題對檢索技巧及檢索結果之影響研究。未出版之碩士論文，國立臺灣大學圖書資訊學研究所，臺北市。
陳昭珍（民84）。從分類編目到資訊組織教育問題之省思，圖書館學刊（臺大），(10)，147-165。
──（民87）。控制詞彙與非控制詞彙主題索引問題之探討 = Problems of controlled vocabulary versus uncontrolled vocabulary in subject indexing。圖書館學刊（臺大）= Journal of Library Science，(13)，103-128。
陳雪華（2010）。臺灣原住民族知識組織架構建構方法之探討 = A study on the method of constructing Taiwan aboriginal knowledge organization structure。教育資料與圖書館學，48(1)，61-86。
童信智（2010）。1980年代臺灣原住民自覺意識的脈絡研究──從民族文學談起。文明探索叢刊，(60)，93-115。
黃邦欣（民88）。淡新檔案行政篇索引典建構之硏究。未出版之碩士論文，國立臺灣大學圖書資訊學研究所，臺北市。
[臺灣大學數位典藏資源中心] (update: 2008.12.16)。臺灣大學典藏數位化計畫。Retrieved April 30, 2011, from http://www.darc.ntu.edu.tw/newdarc/ darc/
index.jsp
廖子儀（2006）。Apache及Tomcat的結合。Retrieved from http://www.l-penguin.
idv.tw/article/download/PDF/apache-jk2-tomcat.pdf
劉少君（2005）。大學博物館對台灣原住民族文物數位化之研究。未出版之碩士論文，國立政治大學民族研究所，臺北市。
蔡家祥（2009）。人類文化的數位典藏與其侷限──以臺灣原住民為例。新北大‧史學，(7)，187-203。
盧秀菊（民86）。中文主題標目與標題表 = A study on Chinese subject headings。中國圖書館學會會報，(59)，25-42。
戴文坡、普賽克著；胡瑋珊譯（1999）。知識管理──企業組織如何有效運用知識。臺北市：中國生產力中心。