Search (9 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Broughton, V."
  • × type_ss:"a"
  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  1. Broughton, V.: Henry Evelyn Bliss : the other immortal or a prophet without honour? (2008) 0.05
    0.048132036 = product of:
      0.09626407 = sum of:
        0.09626407 = sum of:
          0.053210527 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2550) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.053210527 = score(doc=2550,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                0.045395818 = queryNorm
              0.30108726 = fieldWeight in 2550, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2550)
          0.043053545 = weight(_text_:22 in 2550) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.043053545 = score(doc=2550,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.045395818 = queryNorm
              0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2550, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2550)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The paper takes a retrospective look at the work of Henry Evelyn Bliss, classificationist theorist and author of the Bibliographic Classification. Major features of his writings and philosophy are examined and evaluated for the originality of their contribution to the corpus of knowledge in the discipline. Reactions to Bliss's work are analysed, as is his influence on classification theory of the 20th century. Contemporary work on knowledge organization is seen to continue a number of strands from Bliss's original writings. His standing as a classificationist is compared with that of Ranganathan, with the conclusion that he is not given the credit he deserves.
    Date
    9. 2.1997 18:44:22
  2. Broughton, V.: ¬A new classification for the literature of religion (2000) 0.03
    0.026605263 = product of:
      0.053210527 = sum of:
        0.053210527 = product of:
          0.10642105 = sum of:
            0.10642105 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 353) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.10642105 = score(doc=353,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.6021745 = fieldWeight in 353, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=353)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    International cataloguing and bibliographic control. 29(2000) no.4, S.59-61
  3. Broughton, V.: Bliss Bibliographic Classification Second Edition (2009) 0.02
    0.021500299 = product of:
      0.043000598 = sum of:
        0.043000598 = product of:
          0.086001195 = sum of:
            0.086001195 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 3755) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.086001195 = score(doc=3755,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.4866305 = fieldWeight in 3755, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3755)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This entry looks at the origins of the Bliss Bibliographic Classification 2nd edition and the theory on which it is built. The reasons for the decision to revise the classification are examined, as are the influences on classification theory of the mid-twentieth century. The process of revision and construction of schedules using facet analysis is described. The use of BC2 is considered along with some recent development work on thesaural and digital formats.
  4. Broughton, V.: ¬A faceted classification as the basis of a faceted terminology : conversion of a classified structure to thesaurus format in the Bliss Bibliographic Classification, 2nd Edition (2008) 0.02
    0.016125225 = product of:
      0.03225045 = sum of:
        0.03225045 = product of:
          0.0645009 = sum of:
            0.0645009 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1857) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0645009 = score(doc=1857,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.3649729 = fieldWeight in 1857, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1857)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Facet analysis is an established methodology for building classifications and subject indexing systems, but has been less rigorously applied to thesauri. The process of creating a compatible thesaurus from the schedules of the Bliss Bibliographic Classification 2nd edition highlights the ways in which the conceptual relationships in a subject field are handled in the two types of retrieval languages. An underlying uniformity of theory is established, and the way in which software can manage the relationships is discussed. The manner of displaying verbal expressions of concepts (vocabulary control) is also considered, but is found to be less well controlled in the classification than in the thesaurus. Nevertheless, there is good reason to think that facet analysis provides a sound basis for structuring a variety of knowledge organization tools.
  5. Broughton, V.; Lane, H.: ¬The Bliss Bibliographic Classification in action : moving from a special to a universal faceted classification via a digital platform (2004) 0.01
    0.0134376865 = product of:
      0.026875373 = sum of:
        0.026875373 = product of:
          0.053750746 = sum of:
            0.053750746 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2633) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.053750746 = score(doc=2633,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.30414405 = fieldWeight in 2633, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2633)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This paper examines the differences in the functional requirements of a faceted classification system when used in a conventional print-based environment (where the emphasis is on the browse function of the classification) as compared to its application to digital collections (where the retrieval function is paramount). The use of the second edition of Bliss's Bibliographic Classification (BC2) as a general classification for the physical organization of undergraduate collections in the University of Cambridge is described. The development of an online tool for indexing of digital resources using the Bliss terminologies is also described, and the advantages of facet analysis for data structuring and system syntax within the prototype tool are discussed. The move from the print-based environment to the digital makes different demands an both the content and the syntax of the classification, and while the conceptual structure remains similar, manipulation of the scheme and the process of content description can be markedly different.
  6. Broughton, V.: Faceted classification as a basis for knowledge organization in a digital environment : the Bliss Bibliographic Classification as a model for vocabulary management and the creation of multi-dimensional knowledge structures (2001) 0.01
    0.0134376865 = product of:
      0.026875373 = sum of:
        0.026875373 = product of:
          0.053750746 = sum of:
            0.053750746 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5895) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.053750746 = score(doc=5895,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.30414405 = fieldWeight in 5895, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5895)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Broughton is one of the key people working on the second edition of the Bliss Bibliographic Classification (BC2). Her article has a brief, informative history of facets, then discusses semantic vs. syntactic relationships, standard facets used by Ranganathan and the Classification Research Group, facet analysis and citation order, and how to build subject indexes out of faceted classifications, all with occasional reference to digital environments and hypertext, but never with any specifics. It concludes by saying of faceted classification that the "capacity which it has to create highly sophisticated structures for the accommodation of complex objects suggests that it is worth investigation as an organizational tool for digital materials, and that the results of such investigation would be knowledge structures of unparalleled utility and elegance." How to build them is left to the reader, but this article provides an excellent starting point. It includes an example that shows how general concepts can be applied to a small set of documents and subjects, and how terms can be adapted to suit the material and users
  7. Broughton, V.: Faceted classification as a basis for knowledge organization in a digital environment : the Bliss Bibliographic Classification as a model for vocabulary management and the creation of multidimensional knowledge structures (2003) 0.01
    0.011402255 = product of:
      0.02280451 = sum of:
        0.02280451 = product of:
          0.04560902 = sum of:
            0.04560902 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2631) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04560902 = score(doc=2631,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.2580748 = fieldWeight in 2631, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2631)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
  8. Broughton, V.: Language related problems in the construction of faceted terminologies and their automatic management (2008) 0.01
    0.00950188 = product of:
      0.01900376 = sum of:
        0.01900376 = product of:
          0.03800752 = sum of:
            0.03800752 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2497) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03800752 = score(doc=2497,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.21506234 = fieldWeight in 2497, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2497)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Content
    The paper describes current work on the generation of a thesaurus format from the schedules of the Bliss Bibliographic Classification 2nd edition (BC2). The practical problems that occur in moving from a concept based approach to a terminological approach cluster around issues of vocabulary control that are not fully addressed in a systematic structure. These difficulties can be exacerbated within domains in the humanities because large numbers of culture specific terms may need to be accommodated in any thesaurus. The ways in which these problems can be resolved within the context of a semi-automated approach to the thesaurus generation have consequences for the management of classification data in the source vocabulary. The way in which the vocabulary is marked up for the purpose of machine manipulation is described, and some of the implications for editorial policy are discussed and examples given. The value of the classification notation as a language independent representation and mapping tool should not be sacrificed in such an exercise.
  9. McIlwaine, I.C.; Broughton, V.: ¬The Classification Research Group : then and now (2000) 0.01
    0.0076015037 = product of:
      0.0152030075 = sum of:
        0.0152030075 = product of:
          0.030406015 = sum of:
            0.030406015 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 6089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.030406015 = score(doc=6089,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.17204987 = fieldWeight in 6089, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=6089)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The genesis of the Group: In 1948, as part of the post-war renewal of library services in the United Kingdom, the Royal Society organized a Conference on Scientific Information.' What, at the time, must have seemed a minute part of the grand plan, but was later to have a transforming effect on the theory of knowledge organization throughout the remainder of the century, was the setting up of a standing committee of a small group of specialists to investigate the organization and retrieval of scientific information. In 1950, the secretary of that committee, J.D. Bernal, suggested that it might be appropriate to ask a group of librarians to do a study of the problem. After a couple of years of informal discussion it was agreed, in February 1952, to form a Classification Research Group - the CRG as it has become known to subsequent generations. The Group published a brief corporate statement of its views in the Library Association Record in June 1953 and submitted a memorandum to the Library Association Research Committee in May 1955, entitled "The need for a faceted classification as the basis of all methods of information retrieval". This memorandum was published in the proceedings of what has become known as the "Dorking Conference" in 1957. Of the original fifteen members, four still belong to the Group, three of whom are in regular attendance: Eric Coates, Douglas Foskett and Jack Mills. Brian Vickery ceased attending regularly in the 1960s but has retained his interest in their doings: he was present at the 150th celebratory meeting in 1984 and played an active part in the "Dorking revisited" conference held in 1997. The stated aim of the Group was 'To review the basic principles of bibliographic classification, unhampered by allegiance to any particular published scheme' and it can truly be stated that the work of its members has had a fundamental influence on the teaching and practice of information retrieval. It is paradoxical that this collection of people has exerted such a strong theoretical sway because their aims were from the outset and remain essentially practical. This fact is sometimes overlooked in the literature on knowledge organization: there is a tendency to get carried away, and for researchers of today to concentrate so hard on what might be that they overlook what is needed, useful and practical - the entire objective of any retrieval system.