Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Klassifikationstheorie: Elemente / Struktur"
  • × type_ss:"el"
  1. Giunchiglia, F.; Zaihrayeu, I.; Farazi, F.: Converting classifications into OWL ontologies (2009) 0.03
    0.034343183 = product of:
      0.11447728 = sum of:
        0.017148608 = weight(_text_:23 in 4690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017148608 = score(doc=4690,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07217676 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02013827 = queryNorm
            0.23759183 = fieldWeight in 4690, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4690)
        0.017148608 = weight(_text_:23 in 4690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017148608 = score(doc=4690,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07217676 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02013827 = queryNorm
            0.23759183 = fieldWeight in 4690, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4690)
        0.021010485 = weight(_text_:software in 4690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021010485 = score(doc=4690,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07989157 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02013827 = queryNorm
            0.2629875 = fieldWeight in 4690, 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=4690)
        0.017148608 = weight(_text_:23 in 4690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017148608 = score(doc=4690,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07217676 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02013827 = queryNorm
            0.23759183 = fieldWeight in 4690, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4690)
        0.021010485 = weight(_text_:software in 4690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021010485 = score(doc=4690,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07989157 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02013827 = queryNorm
            0.2629875 = fieldWeight in 4690, 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=4690)
        0.021010485 = weight(_text_:software in 4690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021010485 = score(doc=4690,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07989157 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02013827 = queryNorm
            0.2629875 = fieldWeight in 4690, 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=4690)
      0.3 = coord(6/20)
    
    Abstract
    Classification schemes, such as the DMoZ web directory, provide a convenient and intuitive way for humans to access classified contents. While being easy to be dealt with for humans, classification schemes remain hard to be reasoned about by automated software agents. Among other things, this hardness is conditioned by the ambiguous na- ture of the natural language used to describe classification categories. In this paper we describe how classification schemes can be converted into OWL ontologies, thus enabling reasoning on them by Semantic Web applications. The proposed solution is based on a two phase approach in which category names are first encoded in a concept language and then, together with the structure of the classification scheme, are converted into an OWL ontology. We demonstrate the practical applicability of our approach by showing how the results of reasoning on these OWL ontologies can help improve the organization and use of web directories.
    Date
    23. 8.2011 19:43:39
  2. Integrative level classification: Research project (2004-) 0.01
    0.014202118 = product of:
      0.07101059 = sum of:
        0.02000671 = weight(_text_:23 in 1151) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02000671 = score(doc=1151,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07217676 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02013827 = queryNorm
            0.27719048 = fieldWeight in 1151, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1151)
        0.02000671 = weight(_text_:23 in 1151) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02000671 = score(doc=1151,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07217676 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02013827 = queryNorm
            0.27719048 = fieldWeight in 1151, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1151)
        0.02000671 = weight(_text_:23 in 1151) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02000671 = score(doc=1151,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07217676 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02013827 = queryNorm
            0.27719048 = fieldWeight in 1151, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1151)
        0.0109904595 = weight(_text_:der in 1151) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0109904595 = score(doc=1151,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.044984195 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02013827 = queryNorm
            0.24431825 = fieldWeight in 1151, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1151)
      0.2 = coord(4/20)
    
    Date
    30.12.2007 11:44:23
    Footnote
    Mit einer Abbildung der Klassen der ILC als Liniendiagramm (von U. Priss)
  3. References on Integrative level classification (o.J.) 0.01
    0.012861458 = product of:
      0.08574305 = sum of:
        0.028581016 = weight(_text_:23 in 1098) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028581016 = score(doc=1098,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07217676 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02013827 = queryNorm
            0.3959864 = fieldWeight in 1098, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1098)
        0.028581016 = weight(_text_:23 in 1098) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028581016 = score(doc=1098,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07217676 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02013827 = queryNorm
            0.3959864 = fieldWeight in 1098, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1098)
        0.028581016 = weight(_text_:23 in 1098) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028581016 = score(doc=1098,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07217676 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02013827 = queryNorm
            0.3959864 = fieldWeight in 1098, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1098)
      0.15 = coord(3/20)
    
    Date
    30.12.2007 11:44:23
  4. Denton, W.: Putting facets on the Web : an annotated bibliography (2003) 0.01
    0.005571246 = product of:
      0.03714164 = sum of:
        0.012380547 = weight(_text_:software in 2467) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012380547 = score(doc=2467,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.07989157 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02013827 = queryNorm
            0.15496688 = fieldWeight in 2467, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2467)
        0.012380547 = weight(_text_:software in 2467) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012380547 = score(doc=2467,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.07989157 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02013827 = queryNorm
            0.15496688 = fieldWeight in 2467, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2467)
        0.012380547 = weight(_text_:software in 2467) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012380547 = score(doc=2467,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.07989157 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02013827 = queryNorm
            0.15496688 = fieldWeight in 2467, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2467)
      0.15 = coord(3/20)
    
    Abstract
    Consider movie listings in newspapers. Most Canadian newspapers list movie showtimes in two large blocks, for the two major theatre chains. The listings are ordered by region (in large cities), then theatre, then movie, and finally by showtime. Anyone wondering where and when a particular movie is playing must scan the complete listings. Determining what movies are playing in the next half hour is very difficult. When movie listings went onto the web, most sites used a simple faceted organization, always with movie name and theatre, and perhaps with region or neighbourhood (thankfully, theatre chains were left out). They make it easy to pick a theatre and see what movies are playing there, or to pick a movie and see what theatres are showing it. To complete the system, the sites should allow users to browse by neighbourhood and showtime, and to order the results in any way they desired. Thus could people easily find answers to such questions as, "Where is the new James Bond movie playing?" "What's showing at the Roxy tonight?" "I'm going to be out in in Little Finland this afternoon with three hours to kill starting at 2 ... is anything interesting playing?" A hypertext, faceted classification system makes more useful information more easily available to the user. Reading the books and articles below in chronological order will show a certain progression: suggestions that faceting and hypertext might work well, confidence that facets would work well if only someone would make such a system, and finally the beginning of serious work on actually designing, building, and testing faceted web sites. There is a solid basis of how to make faceted classifications (see Vickery in Recommended), but their application online is just starting. Work on XFML (see Van Dijck's work in Recommended) the Exchangeable Faceted Metadata Language, will make this easier. If it follows previous patterns, parts of the Internet community will embrace the idea and make open source software available for others to reuse. It will be particularly beneficial if professionals in both information studies and computer science can work together to build working systems, standards, and code. Each can benefit from the other's expertise in what can be a very complicated and technical area. One particularly nice thing about this area of research is that people interested in combining facets and the web often have web sites where they post their writings.
    This bibliography is not meant to be exhaustive, but unfortunately it is not as complete as I wanted. Some books and articles are not be included, but they may be used in my future work. (These include two books and one article by B.C. Vickery: Faceted Classification Schemes (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers, 1966), Classification and Indexing in Science, 3rd ed. (London: Butterworths, 1975), and "Knowledge Representation: A Brief Review" (Journal of Documentation 42 no. 3 (September 1986): 145-159; and A.C. Foskett's "The Future of Faceted Classification" in The Future of Classification, edited by Rita Marcella and Arthur Maltby (Aldershot, England: Gower, 2000): 69-80). Nevertheless, I hope this bibliography will be useful for those both new to or familiar with faceted hypertext systems. Some very basic resources are listed, as well as some very advanced ones. Some example web sites are mentioned, but there is no detailed technical discussion of any software. The user interface to any web site is extremely important, and this is briefly mentioned in two or three places (for example the discussion of lawforwa.org (see Example Web Sites)). The larger question of how to display information graphically and with hypertext is outside the scope of this bibliography. There are five sections: Recommended, Background, Not Relevant, Example Web Sites, and Mailing Lists. Background material is either introductory, advanced, or of peripheral interest, and can be read after the Recommended resources if the reader wants to know more. The Not Relevant category contains articles that may appear in bibliographies but are not relevant for my purposes.
  5. Franz, S.; Lopatka, T.; Kunze, G.; Meyn, N.; Strupler, N.: Un/Doing Classification : Bibliothekarische Klassifikationssysteme zwischen Universalitätsanspruch und reduktionistischer Wissensorganisation (2022) 0.00
    0.003731501 = product of:
      0.03731501 = sum of:
        0.019551745 = weight(_text_:und in 675) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019551745 = score(doc=675,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.044633795 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02013827 = queryNorm
            0.438048 = fieldWeight in 675, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=675)
        0.017763264 = weight(_text_:der in 675) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017763264 = score(doc=675,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.044984195 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02013827 = queryNorm
            0.3948779 = fieldWeight in 675, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=675)
      0.1 = coord(2/20)
    
    Abstract
    Der multiperspektivische Beitrag analysiert mit einem intersektionalen und qualitativen Ansatz diskriminierende Begriffe, Auslassungen und implizit abwertende Strukturen bibliothekarischer Klassifikationen des Globalen Nordens. Am Beispiel der Regensburger Verbundklassifikation (RVK) werden rassistische und sexistische Schnitt- sowie Leerstellen in der Repräsentation queerer Lebens-, Liebes- und Lustentwürfe aufgezeigt. Mögliche Lösungen unter Einbeziehung der Communitys runden den Beitrag ab.
  6. Maple, A.: Faceted access : a review of the literature (1995) 0.00
    5.506449E-4 = product of:
      0.011012898 = sum of:
        0.011012898 = product of:
          0.022025796 = sum of:
            0.022025796 = weight(_text_:29 in 5099) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.022025796 = score(doc=5099,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.070840135 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02013827 = queryNorm
                0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 5099, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5099)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.05 = coord(1/20)
    
    Date
    20. 8.2006 12:29:16