Several communication models exist; they are models that indicate how
information and data are transmitted. On the technical level, the best-known model
is from Shannon (Shannon 1948). This model is about how information can be
obtained from the sender by the receiver. The transmitter puts the message in a
signal to be transmitted (encode), after transmission the receiver extracts the
message (decode). The context of this model is the telecommunications.
Another communication model comes from linguistics. This model can be found in
the work of the linguist Roman Jacobson about his theory of communicative
functions of language (Jacobson, 1960). In this model a channel encodes a message
in a code. Then the message is intentionally send via a medium to a recipient who
decodes the message. The message must have a context that can be referred to and
that makes it understandable to the recipient. This linguistic model indicates what is
needed to get the contents of a message from sender to recipient while maintaining
interpretability.
For all models, it is important that a message is transmitted without loss - be it in
a technical, linguistic or archival sense. The nice thing is that for all three the core
is the same, for example, there is always a transmitter and receiver, and in all three
cases a message is converted (packed, encoded, encrypted, wrapped, unpacked,
decoded, decrypted, and unwrapped). In the core all three use channels. The
difference is the origin of the models, each with its own characteristics.
The time difference between sending and receiving is invaluable. There is always a
time difference between the time of sending and the moment of receiving
information. In many cases, that time difference will be minimal and almost
negligible because of the state of the art of the technique. But there may be cases
where it is necessary to know if someone could have been aware of a specific
situation at some point. In some transactions, like in stock markets, the quote 'time
is money' has a literal meaning.
Semantic information
As said before, in these turbulent times of digital change an archivist needs a
sustainable fundamental layer on which he can build instruments to do his work.
Parts of that foundation may be found in the philosophy of information. For this it
is necessary to find the conceptual relationship between archival science and
information philosophy.
According to Floridi, philosophy of information is the philosophical field concerned
with the critical investigation of the conceptual nature and basic principles of
information, including its dynamics, utilisation and sciences (Floridi, 2009).
For a possible connection with the philosophy of information, the Leeuwarder
information model (LIM) about meaningful information as described above will be
used. From this starting point it is a small step to a model explained by Floridi
(Floridi, 2010) where he introduces semantic content with elements as meaningful
and well formed. According to Floridi is information semantic when it is also
truthful and therefore true.
rienk jonker a perfect match? connecting partners in the labyrinth of information
Roughly speaking there are connections between two elements that make up
semantic content from philosophical perspective and meaningful information from
the archival perspective. These are from the viewpoint of the philosopher
respectively "meaningful" and "well-formed" and from the viewpoint of the
archivist "context" and "information object". Because the context delivers meaning
to information, both "meaningful" and context" are on the same level. An
information object contains information in such a structured form that it can be
called well-formed.
On the point of semantic information there is a more principle difference between
the philosopher and the archivist. An archivist can only ensure and ascertain that an
information object under his control has the same quality as when it was ingested, it
is trustworthy with guarantees about the integrity. An archivist cannot and from an
ethical viewpoint may not deliver a statement about truthfulness of the
information.2 The answer to the question if the information can be assumed
truthful can only be given by the user of that information acting from his various
contexts. Anyway, knowing this difference, one could say that under certain
conditions the archival trustworthiness is at the same level as the philosophical
truthfulness. This means that a real connection between both fields of study is just
as well possible.
Quality:
Trustworthy
(as is)
Element:
Truthful
Element:
Context
Element:
Well formed
Element:
Meaningful
Element:
Information
object
(structured
content with
behaviour
Semantic
Content
Model Philosophy of Information (PI)
Leeuwarder information model (LIM)
Meaningful
Information
Semantic
Information
Figure 9. Bridging the gap
archives in liquid times
88
part
part
part
part
part
connection
part
part
relation
connection
2 This statement does not release an archivist from a moral obligation to help a user as much as possible
with his research in the archives.
89
