Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
and constituting the basis for the expression and exchange but also the confrontation
of a multitude of identities and cultural references. However, every audiovisual
object possesses its own identity, its own specificity. It is the goal of the
pragmaticdescription*
of the audiovisual object to explicitize, or adapt (i.e. modify
to a greater or lesser degree) that specificity in terms of potential interest for a
particular audience, a particular use in order to support and accompany its
mediatization (and/or re-mediatization) on the various digital networks.
In the following parts of this topic, we shall take a look at how we have
attempted to take account of this incredible multitude of requirements, interests,
expectations, stakes, needs, objectives, etc. of an analysis, while dealing with them
in reference to a
commontheoreticalandmethodologicalframework
.
2.4.Modelsofdescriptionandinteractiveworkingforms
As we have just seen, the working interface of the Description Workshop is
made up of sections, and each section in turn is made up of an interactive form or a
library of forms. Let us now take a more detailed look at the interactive form itself.
Every interactive form making up the working interface of the ASW Description
Workshop, as has already been discussed, represents a
model of description
. A
model of description*
forms part of a
library of models of description*
. Each
domain of knowledge or expertise has
its own
library of models of description.
Certain models are transversal to the different domains, others are specific to a given
domain, and still more can be found in several (but not all) domains.
A model of description is, in turn, completely defined by the
ASW metalinguistic
resources
. As we shall see again in Part 4 of this topic, the ASW metalinguistic
resources consist of:
1. A
conceptual meta-lexicon (or vocabulary)*
representing the two central
dimensions which make up all domains of knowledge/expertise: a) the
objects of
analysis*
and b) the
activities* or actions
of analysis, i.e. the activities by way of
which we identify, locate, name, designate, interpret, comment upon (etc.) a
particular object, or type of object. Of course, the affirmation that the
objects of
analysis
and the
activities of analysis
are two central dimensions in the definition
and development of models of description, does not mean that they are the only
dimensions to be taken into consideration. Other, equally important, dimensions are
the
agents of the analysis
(the people, groups or other actors carrying out an
analysis), the
context of the analysis
(e.g. the temporal context) or the
modalities
determining an analysis (such as the intentions, instructions and other obligations
which determine an analysis, the level of knowledge and “know-how”, etc.). In our
work, we chose primarily to systematize, as far as possible, the approach to the first
