-
Macgregor, G.; McCulloch, E.: Collaborative tagging as a knowledge organisation and resource discovery tool (2006)
0.02
0.016854495 = product of:
0.03370899 = sum of:
0.03370899 = product of:
0.06741798 = sum of:
0.06741798 = weight(_text_:e.g in 764) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06741798 = score(doc=764,freq=2.0), product of:
0.23393378 = queryWeight, product of:
5.2168427 = idf(docFreq=651, maxDocs=44218)
0.044842023 = queryNorm
0.28819257 = fieldWeight in 764, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.2168427 = idf(docFreq=651, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=764)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Purpose - The purpose of the paper is to provide an overview of the collaborative tagging phenomenon and explore some of the reasons for its emergence. Design/methodology/approach - The paper reviews the related literature and discusses some of the problems associated with, and the potential of, collaborative tagging approaches for knowledge organisation and general resource discovery. A definition of controlled vocabularies is proposed and used to assess the efficacy of collaborative tagging. An exposition of the collaborative tagging model is provided and a review of the major contributions to the tagging literature is presented. Findings - There are numerous difficulties with collaborative tagging systems (e.g. low precision, lack of collocation, etc.) that originate from the absence of properties that characterise controlled vocabularies. However, such systems can not be dismissed. Librarians and information professionals have lessons to learn from the interactive and social aspects exemplified by collaborative tagging systems, as well as their success in engaging users with information management. The future co-existence of controlled vocabularies and collaborative tagging is predicted, with each appropriate for use within distinct information contexts: formal and informal. Research limitations/implications - Librarians and information professional researchers should be playing a leading role in research aimed at assessing the efficacy of collaborative tagging in relation to information storage, organisation, and retrieval, and to influence the future development of collaborative tagging systems. Practical implications - The paper indicates clear areas where digital libraries and repositories could innovate in order to better engage users with information. Originality/value - At time of writing there were no literature reviews summarising the main contributions to the collaborative tagging research or debate.
-
Pera, M.S.; Lund, W.; Ng, Y.-K.: ¬A sophisticated library search strategy using folksonomies and similarity matching (2009)
0.02
0.016854495 = product of:
0.03370899 = sum of:
0.03370899 = product of:
0.06741798 = sum of:
0.06741798 = weight(_text_:e.g in 2939) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06741798 = score(doc=2939,freq=2.0), product of:
0.23393378 = queryWeight, product of:
5.2168427 = idf(docFreq=651, maxDocs=44218)
0.044842023 = queryNorm
0.28819257 = fieldWeight in 2939, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.2168427 = idf(docFreq=651, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2939)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Libraries, private and public, offer valuable resources to library patrons. As of today, the only way to locate information archived exclusively in libraries is through their catalogs. Library patrons, however, often find it difficult to formulate a proper query, which requires using specific keywords assigned to different fields of desired library catalog records, to obtain relevant results. These improperly formulated queries often yield irrelevant results or no results at all. This negative experience in dealing with existing library systems turns library patrons away from directly querying library catalogs; instead, they rely on Web search engines to perform their searches first, and upon obtaining the initial information (e.g., titles, subject headings, or authors) on the desired library materials, they query library catalogs. This searching strategy is an evidence of failure of today's library systems. In solving this problem, we propose an enhanced library system, which allows partial, similarity matching of (a) tags defined by ordinary users at a folksonomy site that describe the content of books and (b) unrestricted keywords specified by an ordinary library patron in a query to search for relevant library catalog records. The proposed library system allows patrons posting a query Q using commonly used words and ranks the retrieved results according to their degrees of resemblance with Q while maintaining the query processing time comparable with that achieved by current library search engines.
-
Catarino, M.E.; Baptista, A.A.: Relating folksonomies with Dublin Core (2008)
0.01
0.010740024 = product of:
0.021480048 = sum of:
0.021480048 = product of:
0.042960096 = sum of:
0.042960096 = weight(_text_:22 in 2652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042960096 = score(doc=2652,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15702912 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044842023 = queryNorm
0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 2652, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2652)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Pages
- S.14-22
- Source
- Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
-
Morrison, P.J.: Tagging and searching : search retrieval effectiveness of folksonomies on the World Wide Web (2008)
0.01
0.009113212 = product of:
0.018226424 = sum of:
0.018226424 = product of:
0.03645285 = sum of:
0.03645285 = weight(_text_:22 in 2109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03645285 = score(doc=2109,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15702912 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044842023 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2109, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2109)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 1. 8.2008 12:39:22
-
Kim, H.L.; Scerri, S.; Breslin, J.G.; Decker, S.; Kim, H.G.: ¬The state of the art in tag ontologies : a semantic model for tagging and folksonomies (2008)
0.01
0.0075943437 = product of:
0.0151886875 = sum of:
0.0151886875 = product of:
0.030377375 = sum of:
0.030377375 = weight(_text_:22 in 2650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030377375 = score(doc=2650,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15702912 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044842023 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2650, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2650)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
-
Braun, M.: Lesezeichen zum Stöbern : "Social bookmark"-Seiten setzen auf die Empfehlungen ihrer Nutzer (2007)
0.01
0.006075475 = product of:
0.01215095 = sum of:
0.01215095 = product of:
0.0243019 = sum of:
0.0243019 = weight(_text_:22 in 3373) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0243019 = score(doc=3373,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15702912 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044842023 = queryNorm
0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 3373, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3373)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 3. 5.1997 8:44:22
