Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

0.0153987575 = product of:
  0.04619627 = sum of:
    0.010709076 = weight(_text_:in in 2555) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010709076 = score(doc=2555,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 2555, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2555)
    0.035487194 = product of:
      0.07097439 = sum of:
        0.07097439 = weight(_text_:22 in 2555) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07097439 = score(doc=2555,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15286934 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043654136 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 2555, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2555)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Date

15. 1.2016 19:22:28

0.0145839825 = product of:
  0.043751948 = sum of:
    0.0044621155 = weight(_text_:in in 4996) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0044621155 = score(doc=4996,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.07514416 = fieldWeight in 4996, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4996)
    0.039289832 = weight(_text_:und in 4996) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.039289832 = score(doc=4996,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.09675359 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.40608138 = fieldWeight in 4996, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4996)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

Emanuel Goldberg (1881-1970), Chemiker, Ingenieur und Gründer von Zeis Ikon. Er beeinflusste maßgeblich die Bildtechnologie in der ersten Hälfte des 20. Jahrhunderts. Ist Emanuel Goldberg der Erfinder der ersten Suchmaschine? 1932 bereits entwickelte er ein Gerät, das das Suchen, Auffinden und Anzeigen von beliebig vielen Dokumenten möglich machte. Diese Statistische Maschine, wie er sie nannte, kamen verschiedenste Technologien auf kreative Art und Weise zusammen: Mikrofilm für das Speichern von Dokumenten; Lochkarten für die Spezifikation der Suchanfragen; Elektronik für das Erkennen von Codierungsmustern; Optik; Kinematographie für die beweglichen Teile; und Telefonie für die Dateneingabe. Goldberg leistete Pionierarbeit, denn die Statistische Maschine scheint der erste Bildschirmarbeitsplatz mit elektronischen Komponenten gewesen zu sein und darüber hinaus das erste System zur Auffindung von Dokumenten, das über die Lokalisation von Einträgen mit bereits bekannten Positionsadressen hinausging und sich dem wesentlich anspruchsvolleren Unterfangen widmete, Dokumente hinsichtlich bestimmter Suchkriterien suchen, auswählen und abbilden zu können. Michael Buckland zeichnet hier eine unglaubliche Lebensgeschichte nach, die nicht nur Goldbergs Kreativität und Genialität honoriert, sondern auch ein intellektueller und gesellschaftlicher Spiegel ist - einer historisch wichtigen Zeit für die Geschichte der Informationswissenschaften und Technologie.

0.0020823204 = product of:
  0.012493922 = sum of:
    0.012493922 = weight(_text_:in in 4536) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012493922 = score(doc=4536,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.21040362 = fieldWeight in 4536, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4536)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Document theory examines the concept of a document and how it can serve with other concepts to understand communication, documentation, information, and knowledge. Knowledge organization itself is in practice based on the arrangement of documents representing concepts and knowledge. The word "document" commonly refers to a text or graphic record, but, in a semiotic perspective, non-graphic objects can also be regarded as signifying and, therefore, as documents. The steady increase in the variety and number of documents since prehistoric times enables the development of communities, the division of labor, and reduction of the constraints of space and time. Documents are related to data, facts, texts, works, information, knowledge, signs, and other documents. Documents have physical (material), cognitive, and social aspects.

Series

Reviews of concepts in knowledge organization

0.0010517307 = product of:
  0.006310384 = sum of:
    0.006310384 = weight(_text_:in in 4958) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006310384 = score(doc=4958,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.10626988 = fieldWeight in 4958, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4958)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

During the 20th century there was a strong desire to develop an information science from librarianship, bibliography, and documentation and in 1968 the American Documentation Institute changed its name to the American Society for Information Science. By the beginning of the 21st century, however, departments of (library and) information science had turned instead towards the social sciences. These programs address a variety of important topics, but they have been less successful in providing a coherent explanation of the nature and scope of the field. Progress can be made towards a coherent, unified view of the roles of archives, libraries, museums, online information services, and related organizations if they are treated as information-providing services. However, such an approach seems significantly incomplete on ordinary understandings of the providing of information. Instead of asking what information science is or what we might wish it to become, we ask instead what kind of field it can be given our assumptions about it. We approach the question by examining some keywords: science, information, knowledge, and interdisciplinary. We conclude that if information science is concerned with what people know, then it is a form of cultural engagement, and at most, a science of the artificial.