Search (25 results, page 2 of 2)

  • × author_ss:"Hjoerland, B."
  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. Hjoerland, B.: Knowledge organization (KO) (2017) 0.00
    0.0028207437 = product of:
      0.011282975 = sum of:
        0.011282975 = weight(_text_:information in 3418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011282975 = score(doc=3418,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08310462 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047340166 = queryNorm
            0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 3418, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3418)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    This article presents and discusses the concept "subject" or subject matter (of documents) as it has been examined in library and information science (LIS) for more than 100 years. Different theoretical positions are outlined and it is found that the most important distinction is between documentoriented views versus request-oriented views. The documentoriented view conceives subject as something inherent in documents, whereas the request-oriented view (or the policybased view) understands subject as an attribution made to documents in order to facilitate certain uses of them. Related concepts such as concepts, aboutness, topic, isness and ofness are also briefly presented. The conclusion is that the most fruitful way of defining "subject" (of a document) is the document's informative or epistemological potentials, that is, the document's potentials of informing users and advancing the development of knowledge.
  2. Hjoerland, B.; Scerri, E.; Dupré, J.: Forum: The Philosophy of Classification : The Periodic Table and the Philosophy of Classification - What is the Nature of the Periodic Table as a Classification System? - A Note on the Debate Between Hjørland and Scerri on the Significance of the Periodic Table (2011) 0.00
    0.0024177802 = product of:
      0.009671121 = sum of:
        0.009671121 = weight(_text_:information in 4294) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009671121 = score(doc=4294,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08310462 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047340166 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4294, 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=4294)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Thanks to Professor Eric Scerri for engaging in debate in this journal (Scerri 2011) by replying to my review (Hjørland 2008a) of his book (Scerri 2007). One of my points has been that we in our community (Knowledge Organization, KO / Library and Information Science, LIS) have been too isolated from broader academic fields related to classification and the organization of knowledge. The present debate is a step towards reversing this situation. Bezug zu: Scerri, E.R.: The periodic table: its story and its significance. Oxford: Oxford University Press 2007. xxii, 346 S. und die Rezension dazu in: KO 35(2008) no.4, S.251-254 (B. Hjoerland).
  3. Hjoerland, B.: Theories are knowledge organizing systems (KOS) (2015) 0.00
    0.0024177802 = product of:
      0.009671121 = sum of:
        0.009671121 = weight(_text_:information in 2193) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009671121 = score(doc=2193,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08310462 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047340166 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2193, 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=2193)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    The notion "theory" is a neglected concept in the field of information science and knowledge organization (KO) as well as generally in philosophy and in many other fields, although there are exceptions from this general neglect (e.g., the so-called "theory theory" in cognitive psychology). This article introduces different conceptions of "theory" and argues that a theory is a statement or a conception, which is considered open to be questioned and which is connected with background assumptions. Theories form interconnected systems of grand, middle rank and micro theories and actions, practices and artifacts are theory-laden. The concept of knowledge organization system (KOS) is briefly introduced and discussed. A theory is a form of KOS and theories are the point of departure of any KOS. It is generally understood in KO that concepts are the units of KOSs, but the theory-dependence of concepts brings theories to the forefront in analyzing concepts and KOSs. The study of theories should therefore be given a high priority within KO concerning the construction and evaluation of KOSs.
  4. Hjoerland, B.: Is classification necessary after Google? (2012) 0.00
    0.0020148167 = product of:
      0.008059267 = sum of:
        0.008059267 = weight(_text_:information in 388) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008059267 = score(doc=388,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08310462 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047340166 = queryNorm
            0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 388, 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=388)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to examine challenges facing bibliographic classification at both the practical and theoretical levels. At the practical level, libraries are increasingly dispensing with classifying books. At the theoretical level, many researchers, managers, and users believe that the activity of "classification" is not worth the effort, as search engines can be improved without the heavy cost of providing metadata. Design/methodology/approach - The basic issue in classification is seen as providing criteria for deciding whether A should be classified as X. Such decisions are considered to be dependent on the purpose and values inherent in the specific classification process. These decisions are not independent of theories and values in the document being classified, but are dependent on an interpretation of the discourses within those documents. Findings - At the practical level, there is a need to provide high-quality control mechanisms. At the theoretical level, there is a need to establish the basis of each decision, and to change the philosophy of classification from being based on "standardisation" to being based on classifications tailored to different domains and purposes. Evidence-based practice provides an example of the importance of classifying documents according to research methods. Originality/value - Solving both the practical (organisational) and the theoretical problems facing classification is necessary if the field is to survive both as a practice and as an academic subject within library and information science. This article presents strategies designed to tackle these challenges.
  5. Hjoerland, B.: Subject (of documents) (2016) 0.00
    0.0020148167 = product of:
      0.008059267 = sum of:
        0.008059267 = weight(_text_:information in 3182) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008059267 = score(doc=3182,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08310462 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047340166 = queryNorm
            0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 3182, 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=3182)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    This article presents and discusses the concept "subject" or subject matter (of documents) as it has been examined in library and information science (LIS) for more than 100 years. Different theoretical positions are outlined and it is found that the most important distinction is between document-oriented views versus request-oriented views. The document-oriented view conceive subject as something inherent in documents, whereas the request-oriented view (or the policy based view) understand subject as an attribution made to documents in order to facilitate certain uses of them. Related concepts such as concepts, aboutness, topic, isness and ofness are also briefly presented. The conclusion is that the most fruitful way of defining "subject" (of a document) is the documents informative or epistemological potentials, that is, the documents potentials of informing users and advance the development of knowledge.