What is a ?document??

TLDR

The term “document” traditionally denotes a textual record, yet scholars such as Otlet, Briet, and others have broadened the concept to encompass non‑textual artifacts—including sculpture, museum objects, and live animals—prompting renewed debate over its scope in information science. The paper aims to clarify what should be considered a “document” amid growing access to diverse materials, a question essential for defining the boundaries of Information Science. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Abstract

Ordinarily the word "document" denotes a textual record. Increasingly sophisticated attempts to provide access to the rapidly growing quantity of available documents raised questions about what should be considered a "document." The answer is important for any definition of the scope of Information Science. Paul Otlet and others developed a functional view of "document" and discussed whether, for example, sculpture, museum objects, and live animals, could be considered "documents." Suzanne Briet equated "document" with organized physical evidence. These ideas appear to resemble notions of "material culture" in cultural anthropology and "object-as-sign" in semiotics. Others, especially in the U.S.A. (e.g., Jesse Shera and Louis Shores) took a narrower view. New digital technology renews old questions and also old confusions between medium, message, and meaning. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.