Search (8 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Folksonomies"
  • × theme_ss:"Social tagging"
  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. Watters, C.; Nizam, N.: Knowledge organization on the Web : the emergent role of social classification (2012) 0.01 
    0.007797272 = product of:
  0.01949318 = sum of:
    0.011678694 = weight(_text_:a in 828) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011678694 = score(doc=828,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.21843673 = fieldWeight in 828, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=828)
    0.007814486 = product of:
      0.015628971 = sum of:
        0.015628971 = weight(_text_:information in 828) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015628971 = score(doc=828,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 828, 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=828)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    There are close to a billion websites on the Internet with approximately 400 million users worldwide [www.internetworldstats.com]. People go to websites for a wide variety of different information tasks, from finding a restaurant to serious research. Many of the difficulties with searching the Web, as it is structured currently, can be attributed to increases to scale. The content of the Web is now so large that we only have a rough estimate of the number of sites and the range of information is extremely diverse, from blogs and photos to research articles and news videos.
    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
    Type
    a
  2. Rafferty, P.: Tagging (2018) 0.01 
    0.006474727 = product of:
  0.016186817 = sum of:
    0.010661141 = weight(_text_:a in 4647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010661141 = score(doc=4647,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.19940455 = fieldWeight in 4647, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4647)
    0.005525676 = product of:
      0.011051352 = sum of:
        0.011051352 = weight(_text_:information in 4647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011051352 = score(doc=4647,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 4647, 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=4647)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    This article examines tagging as knowledge organization. Tagging is a kind of indexing, a process of labelling and categorizing information made to support resource discovery for users. Social tagging generally means the practice whereby internet users generate keywords to describe, categorise or comment on digital content. The value of tagging comes when social tags within a collection are aggregated and shared through a folksonomy. This article examines definitions of tagging and folksonomy, and discusses the functions, advantages and disadvantages of tagging systems in relation to knowledge organization before discussing studies that have compared tagging and conventional library-based knowledge organization systems. Approaches to disciplining tagging practice are examined and tagger motivation discussed. Finally, the article outlines current research fronts.
    Type
    a
  3. Peters, I.: Benutzerzentrierte Erschließungsverfahren (2013) 0.01 
    0.00588199 = product of:
  0.014704974 = sum of:
    0.0068111527 = weight(_text_:a in 718) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0068111527 = score(doc=718,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 718, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=718)
    0.007893822 = product of:
      0.015787644 = sum of:
        0.015787644 = weight(_text_:information in 718) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015787644 = score(doc=718,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 718, 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=718)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Source
    Grundlagen der praktischen Information und Dokumentation. Handbuch zur Einführung in die Informationswissenschaft und -praxis. 6., völlig neu gefaßte Ausgabe. Hrsg. von R. Kuhlen, W. Semar u. D. Strauch. Begründet von Klaus Laisiepen, Ernst Lutterbeck, Karl-Heinrich Meyer-Uhlenried
    Type
    a
  4. Peters, I.; Schumann, L.; Terliesner, J.: Folksonomy-basiertes Information Retrieval unter der Lupe (2012) 0.01 
    0.005032917 = product of:
  0.012582293 = sum of:
    0.004767807 = weight(_text_:a in 406) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004767807 = score(doc=406,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.089176424 = fieldWeight in 406, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=406)
    0.007814486 = product of:
      0.015628971 = sum of:
        0.015628971 = weight(_text_:information in 406) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015628971 = score(doc=406,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 406, 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=406)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 63(2012) H.4, S.273-280
    Type
    a
  5. Peters, I.: Folksonomies und kollaborative Informationsdienste : eine Alternative zur Websuche? (2011) 0.00 
    0.0047055925 = product of:
  0.011763981 = sum of:
    0.005448922 = weight(_text_:a in 343) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005448922 = score(doc=343,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 343, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=343)
    0.006315058 = product of:
      0.012630116 = sum of:
        0.012630116 = weight(_text_:information in 343) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012630116 = score(doc=343,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 343, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=343)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Folksonomies ermöglichen den Nutzern in Kollaborativen Informationsdiensten den Zugang zu verschiedenartigen Informationsressourcen. In welchen Fällen beide Bestandteile des Web 2.0 am besten für das Information Retrieval geeignet sind und wo sie die Websuche ggf. ersetzen können, wird in diesem Beitrag diskutiert. Dazu erfolgt eine detaillierte Betrachtung der Reichweite von Social-Bookmarking-Systemen und Sharing-Systemen sowie der Retrievaleffektivität von Folksonomies innerhalb von Kollaborativen Informationsdiensten.
    Type
    a
  6. Spiteri, L.F.: Incorporating facets into social tagging applications : an analysis of current trends (2010) 0.00 
    0.001651617 = product of:
  0.008258085 = sum of:
    0.008258085 = weight(_text_:a in 3561) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008258085 = score(doc=3561,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.1544581 = fieldWeight in 3561, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3561)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    An increasingly difficult challenge in social tagging applications is negotiating the number of existing tags. This article examines the use of facets to facilitate the efficient organization and browsing of tags into manageable and distinct categories. Current and proposed methodologies for the application of facets in social tagging applications are evaluated. Results of this analysis indicate that these methodologies provide insufficient guidelines for the choice, evaluation, and maintenance of the facets. Suggestions are made to guide the design of a more rigorous methodology for the application of facets to social tagging applications.
    Footnote
    Beitrag in einem special issue: Is there a catalog in your future? Celebrating Nancy J. Williamson: Scholar, educator, colleague, mentor
    Type
    a
  7. Lee, Y.Y.; Yang, S.Q.: Folksonomies as subject access : a survey of tagging in library online catalogs and discovery layers (2012) 0.00 
    0.0016346768 = product of:
  0.008173384 = sum of:
    0.008173384 = weight(_text_:a in 309) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008173384 = score(doc=309,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 309, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=309)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    This paper describes a survey on how system vendors and libraries handled tagging in OPACs and discovery layers. Tags are user added subject metadata, also called folksonomies. This survey also investigated user behavior when they face the possibility to tag. The findings indicate that legacy/classic systems have no tagging capability. About 47% of the discovery tools provide tagging function. About 49% of the libraries that have a system with tagging capability have turned the tagging function on in their OPACs and discovery tools. Only 40% of the libraries that turned tagging on actually utilized user added subject metadata as access point to collections. Academic library users are less active in tagging than public library users.
    Type
    a
  8. Chan, L.M.: Social bookmarking and subject indexing (2011) 0.00 
    0.0013622305 = product of:
  0.0068111527 = sum of:
    0.0068111527 = weight(_text_:a in 1806) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0068111527 = score(doc=1806,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 1806, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1806)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Type
    a

Authors

Languages

Types

Themes