-
Will, L.: Thesaurus management software (2009)
0.06
0.05790017 = product of:
0.17370051 = sum of:
0.05872617 = weight(_text_:applications in 3892) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05872617 = score(doc=3892,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.34048924 = fieldWeight in 3892, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3892)
0.01960283 = weight(_text_:of in 3892) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01960283 = score(doc=3892,freq=14.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.31997898 = fieldWeight in 3892, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3892)
0.09537151 = weight(_text_:software in 3892) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09537151 = score(doc=3892,freq=8.0), product of:
0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.61363745 = fieldWeight in 3892, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3892)
0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
- Abstract
- Thesaurus data structures and exchange formats (ways of tagging and encoding thesauri for transfer between computer applications) are discussed. Single- and multiple-user thesaurus software is functionally similar, apart from scale. Several lists of requirements for such software have been published, and important aspects are summarized here, including input, editing, output, and the interfaces used by indexers and searchers. The way in which thesaurus software may be extended to cover other types of controlled vocabularies is covered briefly, followed by issues that arise in management and updating of thesauri, including changes to collections of documents indexed by previous versions and the mapping and merging of thesauri to provide a common search interface.
- Source
- Encyclopedia of library and information sciences. 3rd ed. Ed.: M.J. Bates
-
Will, L.: Thesaurus consultancy (2004)
0.01
0.0122387 = product of:
0.055074148 = sum of:
0.014200641 = weight(_text_:of in 5007) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014200641 = score(doc=5007,freq=10.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.23179851 = fieldWeight in 5007, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5007)
0.040873505 = weight(_text_:software in 5007) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040873505 = score(doc=5007,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.2629875 = fieldWeight in 5007, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5007)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- The role and functions of a consultant in thesaurus development are reviewed, with guidance given an when and how a consultant can be selected. The need for a contract is discussed, and the steps of a thesaurus project are outlined. The cost of thesaurus development is seen to be subject to many variables which makes it difficult to estimate accurately, but some guidelines are given. Testing and feedback are important, and the use of a thesaurus requires an ongoing commitment from the client organisation to maintain and develop it to keep pace with change. Ways in which thesaurus development software can be used are discussed, and attention is drawn to the need for interaction between thesaurus developers and user interface designers to allow the benefits of a thesaurus-based information retrieval system to be fully realised.
-
Will, L.: ¬The ISO 25964 data model for the structure of an information retrieval thesaurus (2012)
0.01
0.007895015 = product of:
0.03552757 = sum of:
0.010999769 = weight(_text_:of in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010999769 = score(doc=862,freq=6.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.17955035 = fieldWeight in 862, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=862)
0.0245278 = weight(_text_:systems in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0245278 = score(doc=862,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.2037246 = fieldWeight in 862, 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=862)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- International standard ISO 25964-1:2011 - Thesauri for information retrieval, includes a detailed data model for thesaurus structure. It is intended to provide a rigorous presentation of the elements and relationships which will not only clarify and standardise the varying and conflicting interpretations which exist but which can also be implemented consistently in automated systems. It makes a clear distinction between concepts and the terms which are used to label them, and includes other features that may be present in a thesaurus, such as compound equivalence, arrays and node labels, concept groups, notes and version history.
- Source
- Categories, contexts and relations in knowledge organization: Proceedings of the Twelfth International ISKO Conference 6-9 August 2012, Mysore, India. Eds.: Neelameghan, A. u. K.S. Raghavan
-
Dextre Clarke, S.G.; Gilchrist, A.; Will, L.: Revision and extension of thesaurus standards (2004)
0.01
0.007026022 = product of:
0.031617098 = sum of:
0.01526523 = weight(_text_:of in 2615) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01526523 = score(doc=2615,freq=26.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.2491759 = fieldWeight in 2615, product of:
5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
26.0 = termFreq=26.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2615)
0.016351866 = weight(_text_:systems in 2615) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016351866 = score(doc=2615,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.1358164 = fieldWeight in 2615, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2615)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- The current standards for monolingual and multilingual thesauri are long overdue for an update. This applies to the international standards ISO 2788 and ISO 5964, as well as the corresponding national standards in several countries and the American standard ANSI/NISO Z39.19. Work is now under way in the UK and in the USA to revise and extend the standards, with particular emphasis on interoperability needs in our world of vast electronic networks. Work in the UK is starting with the British Standards, in the hope of leading on to one international standard to serve all. Some of the issues still under discussion include the treatment of facet analysis, coverage of additional types of controlled vocabulary such as classification schemes, taxonomies and ontologies, and mapping from one vocabulary to another. 1. Are thesaurus standards still needed? Since the 1960s, even before the renowned Cranfield experiments (Cleverdon et al., 1966; Cleverdon, 1967) arguments have raged over the usefulness or otherwise of controlled vocabularies. The case has never been proved definitively one way or the other. At the same time, a recognition has become widespread that no one search method can answer all retrieval requirements. In today's environment of very large networks of resources, the skilled information professional uses a range of techniques. Among these, controlled vocabularies are valued alongside others. The first international standard for monolingual thesauri was issued in 1974. In those days, the main application was for postcoordinate indexing and retrieval from document collections or bibliographic databases. For many information professionals the only practicable alternative to a thesaurus was a classification scheme. And so the thesaurus developed a strong following. After computer systems with full text search capability became widely available, however, the arguments against controlled vocabularies gained more followers. The cost of building and maintaining a thesaurus or a classification scheme was a strong disincentive. Today's databases are typically immense compared with those three decades ago. Full text searching is taken for granted, not just in discrete databases but across all the resources in an intranet or even the Internet. But intranets have brought particular frustration as users discover that despite all the computer power, they cannot find items which they know to be present an the network. So the trend against controlled vocabularies is now being reversed, as many information professionals are turning to them for help. Standards to guide them are still in demand.
- 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
-
Will, L.: ¬The indexing of museum objects (1993)
0.00
0.0018816947 = product of:
0.016935252 = sum of:
0.016935252 = weight(_text_:of in 6101) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016935252 = score(doc=6101,freq=2.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.27643585 = fieldWeight in 6101, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6101)
0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
-
Will, L.: Museum objects as sources of information (1994)
0.00
0.0018816947 = product of:
0.016935252 = sum of:
0.016935252 = weight(_text_:of in 8294) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016935252 = score(doc=8294,freq=8.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.27643585 = fieldWeight in 8294, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8294)
0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
- Abstract
- Museums like libraries, have 2 missions: they preserve objects for the future and they make them available for use today. If objects are intended for use, museum must decide how this can best be achieved; by displaying and interpreting them in exhibitions, and by providing documentary and physical access to objects in store. Discusses these options focusing on the development of museum information centres and of museum catalogues. Describes the structure of the catalogue, name and subject access and the choice between singular forms for indexing, free text indexing, and classification into related groups
-
Will, L.; Will, S.: Dewey for Windows (1997)
0.00
0.0014112709 = product of:
0.012701439 = sum of:
0.012701439 = weight(_text_:of in 771) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012701439 = score(doc=771,freq=2.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.20732689 = fieldWeight in 771, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=771)
0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
- Abstract
- Reviews the CD-ROM database: Dewey for Windows; which provides a searchable version of the DDC
