Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

0.0011693748 = product of:
  0.016371246 = sum of:
    0.016371246 = weight(_text_:information in 1346) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016371246 = score(doc=1346,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052754723 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030051488 = queryNorm
        0.3103276 = fieldWeight in 1346, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1346)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

Theme

Information

0.001033591 = product of:
  0.014470274 = sum of:
    0.014470274 = weight(_text_:information in 419) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014470274 = score(doc=419,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.052754723 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030051488 = queryNorm
        0.27429342 = fieldWeight in 419, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=419)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

Theme

Information

8.2687277E-4 = product of:
  0.0115762185 = sum of:
    0.0115762185 = weight(_text_:information in 3056) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0115762185 = score(doc=3056,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.052754723 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030051488 = queryNorm
        0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 3056, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3056)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

Theme

Information

8.1712543E-4 = product of:
  0.011439756 = sum of:
    0.011439756 = weight(_text_:information in 3059) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011439756 = score(doc=3059,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.052754723 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030051488 = queryNorm
        0.21684799 = fieldWeight in 3059, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3059)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

Abstract

Information Systems (IS) is among the most widespread terms in the Computer Science field but a well founded, widely accepted theory of IS is still missing. With the Internet publication of the FRISCO report, the IFIP task group "FRamework of Information System COncepts" has taken a first step towards such a theory. Among the major achievements of this report are: (1) it builds on a solid basis formed by semiotics and ontology, (2) it defines a compendium of about 100 core IS concepts in a coherent and consistent way, (3) it goes beyond the common narrow view of information systems as pure technical artefacts by adopting an interdisciplinary, socio-technical view on them. In the autumn of 1999, a first review of the report and its impact was undertaken at the ISCO-4 conference in Leiden. In a workshop specifically devoted to the subject, the original aims and goals of FRISCO were confirmed to be still valid and the overall approach and achievements of the report were acknowledged. On the other hand, the workshop revealed some misconceptions, errors and weaknesses of the report in its present form, which are to be removed through a comprehensive revision now under way. This paper reports on the results of the Leiden conference and the current revision activities. It also points out some important consequences of the FRISCO approach as a whole.

Theme

Information

7.3085923E-4 = product of:
  0.010232029 = sum of:
    0.010232029 = weight(_text_:information in 3058) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010232029 = score(doc=3058,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052754723 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030051488 = queryNorm
        0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 3058, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3058)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

Theme

Information

7.2351366E-4 = product of:
  0.010129191 = sum of:
    0.010129191 = weight(_text_:information in 4586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010129191 = score(doc=4586,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.052754723 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030051488 = queryNorm
        0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 4586, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4586)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

Abstract

Die Wikipedia ist sowohl hinsichtlich ihres Umfangs als auch hinsichtlich ihrer Nutzung die heute bedeutendste Enzyklopädie. Auch innerhalb der Wissenschaft spielt sie, vor allem als leicht zugänglicher Rechercheeinstieg, eine wichtige Rolle. In diesem Zusammenhang steht die Glaubwürdigkeit der Wikipedia immer wieder im Fokus, da ihre Inhalte nicht durch Fachexperten kontrolliert, sondern von jedermann ediert werden können. Jedoch ist innerhalb der Wikipediacommunity ein starkes Bemühen um Glaubwürdigkeit festzustellen. Anhand der Analyse ausgewählter Redaktionsprinzipien der Wikipedia und der Auswertung einer Fallstudie zur Erzeugung von Glaubwürdigkeit in der deutschsprachigen Wikipedia lassen sich Implikationen für Information Professionals ableiten. Besonders Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare können durch ihren Zugang zu Literatur einerseits und mit ihren Recherchekenntnissen andererseits dabei helfen, die Glaubwürdigkeit der Wikipedia zu steigern.

Source

Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 69(2018) H.4, S.171-181