Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Campbell, D.G."
  1. Campbell, D.G.: Metadata, metaphor, and metonymy (2005) 0.01
    0.014225784 = product of:
      0.056903135 = sum of:
        0.056903135 = product of:
          0.0853547 = sum of:
            0.04430658 = weight(_text_:systems in 5726) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04430658 = score(doc=5726,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.13181444 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04289195 = queryNorm
                0.33612844 = fieldWeight in 5726, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5726)
            0.041048124 = weight(_text_:29 in 5726) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.041048124 = score(doc=5726,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15088047 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04289195 = queryNorm
                0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 5726, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5726)
          0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    This chapter uses a distinction common in literary studies to distinguish between metadata applications for discovery and metadata applications for use. The author argues that metadata systems for resource discovery, such as the Dublin Core, are continuous with the traditions of bibliographic description, and rely on a principle of metonymy: the use of a surrogate or adjunct object to represent another. Metadata systems for resource use, such as semantic markup languages, are continuous with the traditions of database design, and rely on a principle of metaphor: the use of a paradigmatic image or design which conditions how the user will respond to and interact with the data.
    Date
    29. 9.2008 19:10:34
  2. Campbell, D.G.: Classifying in the context of disability : finding potential solutions in existing schemes (2016) 0.00
    0.0039093453 = product of:
      0.015637381 = sum of:
        0.015637381 = product of:
          0.04691214 = sum of:
            0.04691214 = weight(_text_:29 in 4947) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04691214 = score(doc=4947,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15088047 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04289195 = queryNorm
                0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 4947, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4947)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Knowledge organization for a sustainable world: challenges and perspectives for cultural, scientific, and technological sharing in a connected society : proceedings of the Fourteenth International ISKO Conference 27-29 September 2016, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil / organized by International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), ISKO-Brazil, São Paulo State University ; edited by José Augusto Chaves Guimarães, Suellen Oliveira Milani, Vera Dodebei
  3. Campbell, D.G.: ¬The human life as warrant : a facet analysis of protocols for dealing with responsive behaviours in dementia patients (2014) 0.00
    0.0029056333 = product of:
      0.011622533 = sum of:
        0.011622533 = product of:
          0.0348676 = sum of:
            0.0348676 = weight(_text_:22 in 1413) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0348676 = score(doc=1413,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15020029 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04289195 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1413, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1413)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik
  4. Campbell, D.G.: Tensions between language and discourse in North American knowledge organization : an analysis of conference papers (2010) 0.00
    0.0022378203 = product of:
      0.008951281 = sum of:
        0.008951281 = product of:
          0.026853843 = sum of:
            0.026853843 = weight(_text_:systems in 3356) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.026853843 = score(doc=3356,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13181444 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04289195 = queryNorm
                0.2037246 = fieldWeight in 3356, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3356)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    This paper uses Paul Ricoeur's distinction between language and discourse to help define a North American research agenda in knowledge organization. Ricoeur's concept of discourse as a set of utterances, defined within multiple disciplines and domains, and reducible, not to the word but to the sentence, provides three useful tools for defining our research. First, it enables us to recognize the important contribution of numerous studies that focus on acts of organization, rather than on standards or tools of organization. Second, it provides a paradigm for reconciling the competing demands of interoperability, base on widely-used tools and techniques of library science, and domain integrity, based on user warrant and an understanding of local context. Finally, it resonates with the current economic, political and social climate in which our information systems work, particularly the competing calls for protectionism and globalization.
  5. Kipp, M.E.I.; Campbell, D.G.: Searching with tags : do tags help users find things? (2010) 0.00
    0.0018648503 = product of:
      0.007459401 = sum of:
        0.007459401 = product of:
          0.022378203 = sum of:
            0.022378203 = weight(_text_:systems in 4064) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.022378203 = score(doc=4064,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13181444 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04289195 = queryNorm
                0.1697705 = fieldWeight in 4064, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4064)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    The question of whether tags can be useful in the process of information retrieval was examined in this pilot study. Many tags are subject related and could work well as index terms or entry vocabulary; however, folksonomies also include relationships that are traditionally not included in controlled vocabularies including affective or time and task related tags and the user name of the tagger. Participants searched a social bookmarking tool, specialising in academic articles (CiteULike), and an online journal database (Pubmed) for articles relevant to a given information request. Screen capture software was used to collect participant actions and a semi-structured interview asked them to describe their search process. Preliminary results showed that participants did use tags in their search process, as a guide to searching and as hyperlinks to potentially useful articles. However, participants also used controlled vocabularies in the journal database to locate useful search terms and links to related articles supplied by Pubmed. Additionally, participants reported using user names of taggers and group names to help select resources by relevance. The inclusion of subjective and social information from the taggers is very different from the traditional objectivity of indexing and was reported as an asset by a number of participants. This study suggests that while users value social and subjective factors when searching, they also find utility in objective factors such as subject headings. Most importantly, users are interested in the ability of systems to connect them with related articles whether via subject access or other means.