Search (7 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Gnoli, C."
  • × theme_ss:"Klassifikationstheorie: Elemente / Struktur"
  1. Gnoli, C.: Classifying phenomena : part 4: themes and rhemes (2018) 0.00
    0.0019651123 = product of:
      0.029476684 = sum of:
        0.029476684 = sum of:
          0.005919926 = weight(_text_:information in 4152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.005919926 = score(doc=4152,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.028978055 = queryNorm
              0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4152, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4152)
          0.023556758 = weight(_text_:22 in 4152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.023556758 = score(doc=4152,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.101476215 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.028978055 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4152, 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=4152)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    Abstract
    This is the fourth in a series of papers on classification based on phenomena instead of disciplines. Together with types, levels and facets that have been discussed in the previous parts, themes and rhemes are further structural components of such a classification. In a statement or in a longer document, a base theme and several particular themes can be identified. Base theme should be cited first in a classmark, followed by particular themes, each with its own facets. In some cases, rhemes can also be expressed, that is new information provided about a theme, converting an abstract statement ("wolves, affected by cervids") into a claim that some thing actually occurs ("wolves are affected by cervids"). In the Integrative Levels Classification rhemes can be expressed by special deictic classes, including those for actual specimens, anaphoras, unknown values, conjunctions and spans, whole universe, anthropocentric favoured classes, and favoured host classes. These features, together with rules for pronounciation, make a classification of phenomena a true language, that may be suitable for many uses.
    Date
    17. 2.2018 18:22:25
  2. Gnoli, C.: Naturalism vs pragmatism in knowledge organization (2004) 0.00
    2.79068E-4 = product of:
      0.0041860198 = sum of:
        0.0041860198 = product of:
          0.0083720395 = sum of:
            0.0083720395 = weight(_text_:information in 2663) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0083720395 = score(doc=2663,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.028978055 = queryNorm
                0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 2663, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2663)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    Abstract
    Several authors remark that categories used in languages, including indexing ones, are affected by cultural biases, and do not reflect reality in an objective way. Hence knowledge organization would essentially be determined by pragmatic factors. However, human categories are connected with the structure of reality through biological bonds, and this allows for a naturalistic approach too. Naturalism has been adopted by Farradane in proposing relational categories, and by Dahlberg and the CRG in applying the theory of integrative levels to general classification schemes. The latter is especially relevant for possible developments in making the structure of schemes independent from disciplines, and in applying it to digital information retrieval.
    Source
    Knowledge organization and the global information society: Proceedings of the 8th International ISKO Conference 13-16 July 2004, London, UK. Ed.: I.C. McIlwaine
  3. Gnoli, C.; Ledl, A.; Park, Z.; Trzmielewski, M.: Phenomenon-based vs. disciplinary classification : possibilities for evaluating and for mapping (2018) 0.00
    2.6310782E-4 = product of:
      0.0039466172 = sum of:
        0.0039466172 = product of:
          0.0078932345 = sum of:
            0.0078932345 = weight(_text_:information in 4804) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0078932345 = score(doc=4804,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.028978055 = queryNorm
                0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 4804, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4804)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    Source
    Challenges and opportunities for knowledge organization in the digital age: proceedings of the Fifteenth International ISKO Conference, 9-11 July 2018, Porto, Portugal / organized by: International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), ISKO Spain and Portugal Chapter, University of Porto - Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Research Centre in Communication, Information and Digital Culture (CIC.digital) - Porto. Eds.: F. Ribeiro u. M.E. Cerveira
  4. Gnoli, C.: Metadata about what? : distinguishing between ontic, epistemic, and documental dimensions in knowledge organization (2012) 0.00
    2.3255666E-4 = product of:
      0.0034883497 = sum of:
        0.0034883497 = product of:
          0.0069766995 = sum of:
            0.0069766995 = weight(_text_:information in 323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0069766995 = score(doc=323,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.028978055 = queryNorm
                0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 323, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=323)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    Abstract
    The spread of many new media and formats is changing the scenario faced by knowledge organizers: as printed monographs are not the only standard form of knowledge carrier anymore, the traditional kind of knowledge organization (KO) systems based on academic disciplines is put into question. A sounder foundation can be provided by an analysis of the different dimensions concurring to form the content of any knowledge item-what Brian Vickery described as the steps "from the world to the classifier." The ultimate referents of documents are the phenomena of the real world, that can be ordered by ontology, the study of what exists. Phenomena coexist in subjects with the perspectives by which they are considered, pertaining to epistemology, and with the formal features of knowledge carriers, adding a further, pragmatic layer. All these dimensions can be accounted for in metadata, but are often done so in mixed ways, making indexes less rigorous and interoperable. For example, while facet analysis was originally developed for subject indexing, many "faceted" interfaces today mix subject facets with form facets, and schemes presented as "ontologies" for the "semantic Web" also code for non-semantic information. In bibliographic classifications, phenomena are often confused with the disciplines dealing with them, the latter being assumed to be the most useful starting point, for users will have either one or another perspective. A general citation order of dimensions- phenomena, perspective, carrier-is recommended, helping to concentrate most relevant information at the beginning of headings.
  5. Gnoli, C.: Classifying phenomena : Part 1: dimensions (2016) 0.00
    2.3255666E-4 = product of:
      0.0034883497 = sum of:
        0.0034883497 = product of:
          0.0069766995 = sum of:
            0.0069766995 = weight(_text_:information in 3417) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0069766995 = score(doc=3417,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.028978055 = queryNorm
                0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 3417, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3417)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    Abstract
    This is the first part of a study on the classification of phenomena. It starts by addressing the status of classification schemes among knowledge organization systems (KOSs), as some features of them have been overlooked in recent reviews of KOS types. It then considers the different dimensions implied in a KOS, which include: the observed phenomena, the cultural and disciplinary perspective under which they are treated, the features of documents carrying such treatment, the collections of such documents as managed in libraries, archives or museums, the information needs prompting to search and use these collections and the people experiencing such different information needs. Until now, most library classification schemes have given priority to the perspective dimension as they first list disciplines. However, an increasing number of voices are now considering the possibility of classification schemes giving priority to phenomena as advocated in the León Manifesto. Although these schemes first list phenomena as their main classes, they can as well express perspective or the other relevant dimensions that occur in a classified item. The independence of a phenomenon-based classification from the institutional divisions into disciplines contributes to giving knowledge organization a more proactive and influential role.
  6. Gnoli, C.; Mei, H.: Freely faceted classification for Web-based information retrieval (2006) 0.00
    1.9733087E-4 = product of:
      0.002959963 = sum of:
        0.002959963 = product of:
          0.005919926 = sum of:
            0.005919926 = weight(_text_:information in 534) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.005919926 = score(doc=534,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.028978055 = queryNorm
                0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 534, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=534)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
  7. Gnoli, C.: Progress in synthetic classification : towards unique definition of concepts (2007) 0.00
    1.6444239E-4 = product of:
      0.0024666358 = sum of:
        0.0024666358 = product of:
          0.0049332716 = sum of:
            0.0049332716 = weight(_text_:information in 2527) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0049332716 = score(doc=2527,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.028978055 = queryNorm
                0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 2527, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2527)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    Content
    Beitrag anlässlich: Proceedings of the International Seminar "Information access for the global community", 4-5 June 2007, The Hague. - Vgl.: http://www.udcc.org/seminar07/presentations/gnoli.pdf.