Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

0.025967881 = product of:
  0.07790364 = sum of:
    0.0458745 = weight(_text_:und in 675) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0458745 = score(doc=675,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.104724824 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04725067 = 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)
    0.03202915 = weight(_text_:des in 675) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03202915 = score(doc=675,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13085164 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04725067 = queryNorm
        0.24477452 = fieldWeight in 675, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=675)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

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.

0.005255251 = product of:
  0.031531505 = sum of:
    0.031531505 = product of:
      0.06306301 = sum of:
        0.06306301 = weight(_text_:thesaurus in 311) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06306301 = score(doc=311,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.21834905 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6210785 = idf(docFreq=1182, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04725067 = queryNorm
            0.2888174 = fieldWeight in 311, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.6210785 = idf(docFreq=1182, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=311)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Methodology Based on information from research papers, more research was done on SKOS and examples of SKOS and shared faceted classifications in the Semantic Web and about SKOS and how to express SKOS in RDF/XML. Once confident with these ideas, the author used a faceted taxonomy created in a Vocabulary Design class and encoded it using SKOS. Instead of writing RDF in a program such as Notepad, a thesaurus tool was used to create the taxonomy according to SKOS standards and then export the thesaurus in RDF/XML format. These processes and tools are then analyzed. Results The initial statement of the problem was simply an extension of the survey paper done earlier in this class. To continue on with the research, more research was done into SKOS - a standard for expressing thesauri, taxonomies and faceted classifications so they can be shared on the semantic web.