Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Panzer, M."
  • × type_ss:"a"
  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. Panzer, M.: Two tales of a concept : aligning FRSAD with SKOS (2011) 0.01 
    0.0083865 = product of:
  0.050318997 = sum of:
    0.025159499 = weight(_text_:web in 4789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025159499 = score(doc=4789,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11629491 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.035634913 = queryNorm
        0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 4789, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4789)
    0.025159499 = weight(_text_:web in 4789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025159499 = score(doc=4789,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11629491 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.035634913 = queryNorm
        0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 4789, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4789)
  0.16666667 = coord(2/12)
    Abstract
    The FRSAD model provides an abstract analysis of subject authority data. The article tries to assess the compatibility of this conceptual framework with formalisms and practices that have emerged from the Semantic Web community. Through applying SKOS, it becomes apparent that some interpretive decisions necessary to accommodate the rigor of formal knowledge representation languages are not supported by FRSAD itself. Difficulties in clearly aligning the thema entity with either a SKOS or OWL counterpart reveal ambiguities in the FRSAD model regarding the ontological status of thema, which seems to reflect a general uncertainty regarding the aboutness of subject authority data in the library domain.
  2. Green, R.; Panzer, M.: Relations in the notational hierarchy of the Dewey Decimal Classification (2011) 0.01 
    0.0069887503 = product of:
  0.0419325 = sum of:
    0.02096625 = weight(_text_:web in 4823) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02096625 = score(doc=4823,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11629491 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.035634913 = queryNorm
        0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 4823, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4823)
    0.02096625 = weight(_text_:web in 4823) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02096625 = score(doc=4823,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11629491 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.035634913 = queryNorm
        0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 4823, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4823)
  0.16666667 = coord(2/12)
    Abstract
    As part of a larger assessment of relationships in the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) system, this study investigates the semantic nature of relationships in the DDC notational hierarchy. The semantic relationship between each of a set of randomly selected classes and its parent class in the notational hierarchy is examined against a set of relationship types (specialization, class-instance, several flavours of whole-part).The analysis addresses the prevalence of specific relationship types, their lexical expression, difficulties encountered in assigning relationship types, compatibility of relationships found in the DDC with those found in other knowledge organization systems (KOS), and compatibility of relationships found in the DDC with those in a shared formalism like the Web Ontology Language (OWL). Since notational hierarchy is an organizational mechanism shared across most classification schemes and is often considered to provide an easy solution for ontological transformation of a classification system, the findings of the study are likely to generalize across classification schemes with respect to difficulties that might be encountered in such a transformation process.

Themes