Search (8 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Zins, C."
  • × language_ss:"e"
  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  1. Zins, C.: Models for classifying Internet resources (2002) 0.00 
    0.0038537113 = product of:
  0.026975978 = sum of:
    0.020922182 = weight(_text_:web in 1160) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020922182 = score(doc=1160,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 1160, 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=1160)
    0.0060537956 = weight(_text_:information in 1160) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0060537956 = score(doc=1160,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 1160, 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=1160)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    Designing systematic access to Internet resources is a major item an the agenda of researchers and practitioners in the field of information science, and is the focus of this study. A critical analysis of classification schemes used in major portals and Web classified directories exposes inconsistencies in the way they classify Internet resources. The inconsistencies indicate that the developers fall to differentiate the various classificatory models, and are unaware of their different rationales. The study establishes eight classificatory models for resources available to Internet users. Internet resources can be classified by subjects, objects, applications, users, locations, reference sources, media, and languages. The first five models are contentrelated; namely they characterize the content of the resource. The other three models are formst-related; namely they characterize the format of the resource or its technological infrastructure. The study identifies and formulates the eight classificatory models, analyzes their rationales, and discusses alternative ways to combine them in a faceted integrated classification scheme.
  2. Zins, C.: Redefining information science : from "information science" to "knowledge science" (2006) 0.00 
    0.0015254131 = product of:
  0.021355784 = sum of:
    0.021355784 = weight(_text_:information in 5551) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021355784 = score(doc=5551,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.41052482 = fieldWeight in 5551, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5551)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    Abstract
    Purpose - This philosophical essay aims to explore the concept of information science. Design/methodology/approach - The philosophical argumentation is composed of five phases. It is based on clarifying the meanings of its basic concept "data", "information" and "knowledge". Findings - The study suggests that the name of the field "information science" should be changed to "knowledge science". Originality/value - The paper offers reflections on the explored phenomena of information science.
    Theme
    Information
  3. Zins, C.; Guttmann, D.: Structuring Web bibliographic resources : an exemplary subject classification scheme (2000) 0.00 
    0.0014944416 = product of:
  0.020922182 = sum of:
    0.020922182 = weight(_text_:web in 6056) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020922182 = score(doc=6056,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 6056, 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=6056)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
  4. Zins, C.: Conceptions of information science (2007) 0.00 
    0.0014268934 = product of:
  0.019976506 = sum of:
    0.019976506 = weight(_text_:information in 140) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019976506 = score(doc=140,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.3840108 = fieldWeight in 140, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=140)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    Abstract
    The field of information science is constantly changing. Therefore, information scientists are required to regularly review-and if necessary-redefine its fundamental building blocks. This article is one of four articles that documents the results of the Critical Delphi study conducted in 2003-2005. The study, "Knowledge Map of Information Science," was aimed at exploring the foundations of information science. The international panel was composed of 57 leading scholars from 16 countries who represent nearly all the major subfields and important aspects of the field. In this study, the author documents 50 definitions of information science, maps the major theoretical issues relevant to the formulation of a systematic conception, formulates six different conceptions of the field, and discusses their implications.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.3, S.335-350
    Theme
    Information
  5. Zins, C.: Conceptual approaches for defining data, information, and knowledge (2007) 0.00 
    0.0014268934 = product of:
  0.019976506 = sum of:
    0.019976506 = weight(_text_:information in 428) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019976506 = score(doc=428,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.3840108 = fieldWeight in 428, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=428)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    Abstract
    The field of Information Science is constantly changing. Therefore, information scientists are required to regularly review-and if necessary-redefine its fundamental building blocks. This article is one of a group of four articles, which resulted from a Critical Delphi study conducted in 2003-2005. The study, "Knowledge Map of Information Science," was aimed at exploring the foundations of information science. The international panel was composed of 57 leading scholars from 16 countries, who represent (almost) all the major subfields and important aspects of the field. This particular article documents 130 definitions of data, information, and knowledge formulated by 45 scholars, and maps the major conceptual approaches for defining these three key concepts.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.4, S.479-493
    Theme
    Information
  6. Zins, C.: Classification schemes of information science : twenty-eight scholars map the field (2007) 0.00 
    0.0012230515 = product of:
  0.01712272 = sum of:
    0.01712272 = weight(_text_:information in 274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01712272 = score(doc=274,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.3291521 = fieldWeight in 274, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=274)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    Abstract
    The field of Information Science is constantly changing. Therefore, information scientists are required to regularly review-and if necessary-redefine its fundamental building blocks. This article is one of a group of four articles, which resulted from a Critical Delphi study conducted in 2003-2005. The study, "Knowledge Map of Information Science," was aimed at exploring the foundations of information science. The international panel was composed of 57 leading scholars from 16 countries who represent nearly all the major subfields and important aspects of the field. This particular article documents 28 classification schemes of Information Science that were compiled by leading scholars in the academic community. This unique collection of 28 classification schemes portrays and documents the profile of contemporary Information Science at the beginning of the 21st century.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.5, S.645-672
  7. Zins, C.: Knowledge map of information science (2007) 0.00 
    0.0010591936 = product of:
  0.01482871 = sum of:
    0.01482871 = weight(_text_:information in 430) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01482871 = score(doc=430,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.2850541 = fieldWeight in 430, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=430)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    Abstract
    This article is part of a group of four articles that resulted from a Critical Delphi study conducted in 2003-2005. The study, "Knowledge Map of Information Science," was aimed at exploring the foundations of information science. The international panel was composed of 57 leading scholars from 16 countries who represent nearly all the major subfields and important aspects of the field. This article presents a systematic and comprehensive knowledge map of the field, and is grounded on the panel discussions. The map has 10 basic categories: (1) Foundations, (2) Resources, (3) Knowledge Workers, (4) Contents, (5) Applications, (6) Operations and Processes, (7) Technologies, (8) Environments, (9) Organizations, and (10) Users. The model establishes the groundwork for formulating theories of information science, as well as developing and evaluating information science academic programs and bibliographic resources.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.4, S.526-535
  8. Zins, C.: Knowledge map of information science : issues, principles, implications (2006) 0.00 
    0.0010591936 = product of:
  0.01482871 = sum of:
    0.01482871 = weight(_text_:information in 2287) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01482871 = score(doc=2287,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.2850541 = fieldWeight in 2287, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2287)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    Abstract
    The study, "Knowledge Map of Information Science: Issues, Principles, Implications", explores the theoretical foundations of information science. It maps the conceptual approaches for defining "data", "information", and "knowledge", maps the major conceptions of Information Science, portrays the profile of contemporary Information Science by documenting 28 classification schemes compiled by leading scholars during the study, and culminates in developing a systematic and scientifically based knowledge map of the field, one grounded on a solid theoretical basis. The study was supported by a research grant from the Israel Science Foundation (2003-2005). The scientific methodology is Critical Delphi. The international panel was composed of 57 leading scholars from 16 countries who represent nearly all the major sub-fields and important aspects of the field.

Themes