-
LaBarre, K.: Interrogating facet theory : decolonizing knowledge organization (2017)
0.04
0.043286037 = product of:
0.08657207 = sum of:
0.08657207 = product of:
0.1298581 = sum of:
0.087483615 = weight(_text_:k in 4155) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.087483615 = score(doc=4155,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1848414 = queryWeight, product of:
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.05177952 = queryNorm
0.47329018 = fieldWeight in 4155, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4155)
0.04237449 = weight(_text_:h in 4155) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04237449 = score(doc=4155,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12864359 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.05177952 = queryNorm
0.32939452 = fieldWeight in 4155, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4155)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Dimensions of knowledge: facets for knowledge organization. Eds.: R.P. Smiraglia, u. H.-L. Lee
-
Hjoerland, B.: Theories of knowledge organization - theories of knowledge (2017)
0.03
0.033379994 = product of:
0.06675999 = sum of:
0.06675999 = product of:
0.100139976 = sum of:
0.05103211 = weight(_text_:k in 3494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05103211 = score(doc=3494,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1848414 = queryWeight, product of:
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.05177952 = queryNorm
0.27608594 = fieldWeight in 3494, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3494)
0.04910787 = weight(_text_:22 in 3494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04910787 = score(doc=3494,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18132305 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05177952 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3494, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3494)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Pages
- S.22-36
- Source
- Theorie, Semantik und Organisation von Wissen: Proceedings der 13. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) und dem 13. Internationalen Symposium der Informationswissenschaft der Higher Education Association for Information Science (HI) Potsdam (19.-20.03.2013): 'Theory, Information and Organization of Knowledge' / Proceedings der 14. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) und Natural Language & Information Systems (NLDB) Passau (16.06.2015): 'Lexical Resources for Knowledge Organization' / Proceedings des Workshops der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) auf der SEMANTICS Leipzig (1.09.2014): 'Knowledge Organization and Semantic Web' / Proceedings des Workshops der Polnischen und Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) Cottbus (29.-30.09.2011): 'Economics of Knowledge Production and Organization'. Hrsg. von W. Babik, H.P. Ohly u. K. Weber
-
Vukadin, A.; Slavic, A.: Challenges of facet analysis and concept placement in Universal Classifications : the example of architecture in UDC (2014)
0.03
0.031865202 = sum of:
0.017834382 = product of:
0.07133753 = sum of:
0.07133753 = weight(_text_:authors in 1428) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07133753 = score(doc=1428,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2360532 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.05177952 = queryNorm
0.30220953 = fieldWeight in 1428, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1428)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.01403082 = product of:
0.042092457 = sum of:
0.042092457 = weight(_text_:22 in 1428) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042092457 = score(doc=1428,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18132305 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05177952 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1428, 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=1428)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- The paper discusses the challenges of faceted vocabulary organization in universal classifications which treat the universe of knowledge as a coherent whole and in which the concepts and subjects in different disciplines are shared, related and combined. The authors illustrate the challenges of the facet analytical approach using, as an example, the revision of class 72 in UDC. The paper reports on the research undertaken in 2013 as preparation for the revision. This consisted of analysis of concept organization in the UDC schedules in comparison with the Art & Architecture Thesaurus and class W of the Bliss Bibliographic Classification. The paper illustrates how such research can contribute to a better understanding of the field and may lead to improvements in the facet structure of this segment of the UDC vocabulary.
- Source
- Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik
-
Lorenz, B.: Zur Theorie und Terminologie der bibliothekarischen Klassifikation (2018)
0.03
0.028124314 = product of:
0.056248628 = sum of:
0.056248628 = product of:
0.08437294 = sum of:
0.028249662 = weight(_text_:h in 4339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028249662 = score(doc=4339,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12864359 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.05177952 = queryNorm
0.21959636 = fieldWeight in 4339, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4339)
0.05612328 = weight(_text_:22 in 4339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05612328 = score(doc=4339,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18132305 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05177952 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4339, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4339)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Pages
- S.1-22
- Source
- Klassifikationen in Bibliotheken: Theorie - Anwendung - Nutzen. Hrsg.: H. Alex, G. Bee u. U. Junger
-
Bowker, G.C.; Star, S.L.: Sorting things out : classification and its consequences (1999)
0.03
0.025301648 = sum of:
0.020593371 = product of:
0.082373485 = sum of:
0.082373485 = weight(_text_:authors in 733) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.082373485 = score(doc=733,freq=6.0), product of:
0.2360532 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.05177952 = queryNorm
0.34896153 = fieldWeight in 733, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=733)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.004708277 = product of:
0.014124831 = sum of:
0.014124831 = weight(_text_:h in 733) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014124831 = score(doc=733,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12864359 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.05177952 = queryNorm
0.10979818 = fieldWeight in 733, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=733)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Is this book sociology, anthropology, or taxonomy? Sorting Things Out, by communications theorists Geoffrey C. Bowker and Susan Leigh Star, covers a lot of conceptual ground in its effort to sort out exactly how and why we classify and categorize the things and concepts we encounter day to day. But the analysis doesn't stop there; the authors go on to explore what happens to our thinking as a result of our classifications. With great insight and precise academic language, they pick apart our information systems and language structures that lie deeper than the everyday categories we use. The authors focus first on the International Classification of Diseases (ICD), a widely used scheme used by health professionals worldwide, but also look at other health information systems, racial classifications used by South Africa during apartheid, and more. Though it comes off as a bit too academic at times (by the end of the 20th century, most writers should be able to get the spelling of McDonald's restaurant right), the book has a clever charm that thoughtful readers will surely appreciate. A sly sense of humor sneaks into the writing, giving rise to the chapter title "The Kindness of Strangers," for example. After arguing that categorization is both strongly influenced by and a powerful reinforcer of ideology, it follows that revolutions (political or scientific) must change the way things are sorted in order to throw over the old system. Who knew that such simple, basic elements of thought could have such far-reaching consequences? Whether you ultimately place it with social science, linguistics, or (as the authors fear) fantasy, make sure you put Sorting Things Out in your reading pile.
- Footnote
- Rez. in: Knowledge organization 27(2000) no.3, H.175-177 (B. Kwasnik); College and research libraries 61(2000) no.4, S.380-381 (J. Williams); Library resources and technical services 44(2000) no.4, S.107-108 (H.A. Olson); JASIST 51(2000) no.12, S.1149-1150 (T.A. Brooks)
-
Olson, H.; Nielsen, J.; Dippie, S.R.: Encyclopaedist rivalry, classificatory commonality, illusory universality (2003)
0.02
0.016597863 = sum of:
0.011889587 = product of:
0.04755835 = sum of:
0.04755835 = weight(_text_:authors in 2761) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04755835 = score(doc=2761,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2360532 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.05177952 = queryNorm
0.20147301 = fieldWeight in 2761, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2761)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.004708277 = product of:
0.014124831 = sum of:
0.014124831 = weight(_text_:h in 2761) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014124831 = score(doc=2761,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12864359 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.05177952 = queryNorm
0.10979818 = fieldWeight in 2761, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2761)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- This paper describes the cultural construction of classification as exemplified by the French Encyclopòudists, Jean d'Alembert and Denis Diderot, and the encyclopaedism of Samuel Taylor Coleridge analysing original texts digitized and encoded using XML and an adaptation of TEI. 1. Introduction This paper, focusing an encyclopaedism, is part of a larger study exploring the cultural construction of classification. The larger study explores possible foundations for bias in the structure of classifications with a view to more equitable practice. Bias in classification has been documented relative to race, ethnicity, gender, religion, sexuality and other factors. Analyses and proposed solutions have addressed only acute biases in particular systems, not the systems themselves. The project tentatively identifies the systemic roots of bias are culturally specific and reflected in the structure of conventional classifcatory practices. A wide range of western cultural texts from classic Greek philosophy to twentieth-century ethnography is being analysed. The consistency with which certain presumptions are revealed, no matter how different the philosophical and social views of the authors, indicates their ubiquity in western thought, though it is not mirrored in many other cultures. We hope that an understanding of these fundamental cultural presumptions will make space for development of alternative approaches to knowledge organization that can work alongside conventional methods. This paper describes an example of the first phase of the project, which is a deconstruction developed from relevant texts. In the context of encyclopaedism the key texts used in this paper are Jean d'Alembert's Preliminary Discourse to the Encyclopedie, selections from Denis Diderot's contributions to the Encyclopedie, and Samuel Taylor Coleridge's Treatise an Method and Prospectus of the Encyclopedia Metropolitana. We are analysing these texts in digital form using Extensible Markup Language (XML) implemented via a document type definition (DTD) created for the purpose including elements of the Text Encoding Initiative (TEI). We will first explain the encoding methodology; then define the differences between the French Encyclopaedists and the English Coleridge; deconstruct these differences by allowing the commonalities between the texts to emerge; and, finally, examine their cultural specificity.
-
Kumar, K.: Theoretical bases for universal classification systems (1982)
0.01
0.014580603 = product of:
0.029161206 = sum of:
0.029161206 = product of:
0.087483615 = sum of:
0.087483615 = weight(_text_:k in 34) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.087483615 = score(doc=34,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1848414 = queryWeight, product of:
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.05177952 = queryNorm
0.47329018 = fieldWeight in 34, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=34)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Maniez, J.: ¬Des classifications aux thesaurus : du bon usage des facettes (1999)
0.01
0.01403082 = product of:
0.02806164 = sum of:
0.02806164 = product of:
0.084184915 = sum of:
0.084184915 = weight(_text_:22 in 6404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.084184915 = score(doc=6404,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18132305 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05177952 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6404, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6404)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 1. 8.1996 22:01:00
-
Maniez, J.: ¬Du bon usage des facettes : des classifications aux thésaurus (1999)
0.01
0.01403082 = product of:
0.02806164 = sum of:
0.02806164 = product of:
0.084184915 = sum of:
0.084184915 = weight(_text_:22 in 3773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.084184915 = score(doc=3773,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18132305 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05177952 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3773, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3773)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 1. 8.1996 22:01:00
-
Foskett, D.J.: Systems theory and its relevance to documentary classification (2017)
0.01
0.01403082 = product of:
0.02806164 = sum of:
0.02806164 = product of:
0.084184915 = sum of:
0.084184915 = weight(_text_:22 in 3176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.084184915 = score(doc=3176,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18132305 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05177952 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3176, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3176)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 6. 5.2017 18:46:22
-
Facets: a fruitful notion in many domains : special issue on facet analysis (2008)
0.01
0.013506243 = sum of:
0.0074309926 = product of:
0.02972397 = sum of:
0.02972397 = weight(_text_:authors in 3262) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02972397 = score(doc=3262,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2360532 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.05177952 = queryNorm
0.12592064 = fieldWeight in 3262, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3262)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.006075251 = product of:
0.018225752 = sum of:
0.018225752 = weight(_text_:k in 3262) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018225752 = score(doc=3262,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1848414 = queryWeight, product of:
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.05177952 = queryNorm
0.098602116 = fieldWeight in 3262, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.569778 = idf(docFreq=3384, maxDocs=44218)
0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3262)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Footnote
- Rez. in: KO 36(2009) no.1, S.62-63 (K. La Barre): "This special issue of Axiomathes presents an ambitious dual agenda. It attempts to highlight aspects of facet analysis (as used in LIS) that are shared by cognate approaches in philosophy, psychology, linguistics and computer science. Secondarily, the issue aims to attract others to the study and use of facet analysis. The authors represent a blend of lifetime involvement with facet analysis, such as Vickery, Broughton, Beghtol, and Dahlberg; those with well developed research agendas such as Tudhope, and Priss; and relative newcomers such as Gnoli, Cheti and Paradisi, and Slavic. Omissions are inescapable, but a more balanced issue would have resulted from inclusion of at least one researcher from the Indian school of facet theory. Another valuable addition might have been a reaction to the issue by one of the chief critics of facet analysis. Potentially useful, but absent, is a comprehensive bibliography of resources for those wishing to engage in further study, that now lie scattered throughout the issue. Several of the papers assume relative familiarity with facet analytical concepts and definitions, some of which are contested even within LIS. Gnoli's introduction (p. 127-130) traces the trajectory, extensions and new developments of this analytico- synthetic approach to subject access, while providing a laundry list of cognate approaches that are similar to facet analysis. This brief essay and the article by Priss (p. 243-255) directly addresses this first part of Gnoli's agenda. Priss provides detailed discussion of facet-like structures in computer science (p. 245- 246), and outlines the similarity between Formal Concept Analysis and facets. This comparison is equally fruitful for researchers in computer science and library and information science. By bridging into a discussion of visualization challenges for facet display, further research is also invited. Many of the remaining papers comprehensively detail the intellectual heritage of facet analysis (Beghtol; Broughton, p. 195-198; Dahlberg; Tudhope and Binding, p. 213-215; Vickery). Beghtol's (p. 131-144) examination of the origins of facet theory through the lens of the textbooks written by Ranganathan's mentor W.C.B. Sayers (1881-1960), Manual of Classification (1926, 1944, 1955) and a textbook written by Mills A Modern Outline of Classification (1964), serves to reveal the deep intellectual heritage of the changes in classification theory over time, as well as Ranganathan's own influence on and debt to Sayers.
-
Cordeiro, M.I.; Slavic, A.: Data models for knowledge organization tools : evolution and perspectives (2003)
0.01
0.012610812 = product of:
0.025221623 = sum of:
0.025221623 = product of:
0.100886494 = sum of:
0.100886494 = weight(_text_:authors in 2632) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.100886494 = score(doc=2632,freq=4.0), product of:
0.2360532 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.05177952 = queryNorm
0.42738882 = fieldWeight in 2632, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2632)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This paper focuses on the need for knowledge organization (KO) tools, such as library classifications, thesauri and subject heading systems, to be fully disclosed and available in the open network environment. The authors look at the place and value of traditional library knowledge organization tools in relation to the technical environment and expectations of the Semantic Web. Future requirements in this context are explored, stressing the need for KO systems to support semantic interoperability. In order to be fully shareable KO tools need to be reframed and reshaped in terms of conceptual and data models. The authors suggest that some useful approaches to this already exist in methodological and technical developments within the fields of ontology modelling and lexicographic and terminological data interchange.
-
Kwasnik, B.H.; Rubin, V.L.: Stretching conceptual structures in classifications across languages and cultures (2003)
0.01
0.012610812 = product of:
0.025221623 = sum of:
0.025221623 = product of:
0.100886494 = sum of:
0.100886494 = weight(_text_:authors in 5517) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.100886494 = score(doc=5517,freq=4.0), product of:
0.2360532 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.05177952 = queryNorm
0.42738882 = fieldWeight in 5517, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5517)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The authors describe the difficulties of translating classifications from a source language and culture to another language and culture. To demonstrate these problems, kinship terms and concepts from native speakers of fourteen languages were collected and analyzed to find differences between their terms and structures and those used in English. Using the representations of kinship terms in the Library of Congress Classification (LCC) and the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) as examples, the authors identified the source of possible lack of mapping between the domain of kinship in the fourteen languages studied and the LCC and DDC. Finally, some preliminary suggestions for how to make translated classifications more linguistically and culturally hospitable are offered.
-
Smiraglia, R.P.; Heuvel, C. van den: Classifications and concepts : towards an elementary theory of knowledge interaction (2013)
0.01
0.01050901 = product of:
0.02101802 = sum of:
0.02101802 = product of:
0.08407208 = sum of:
0.08407208 = weight(_text_:authors in 1758) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08407208 = score(doc=1758,freq=4.0), product of:
0.2360532 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.05177952 = queryNorm
0.35615736 = fieldWeight in 1758, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1758)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Purpose - This paper seeks to outline the central role of concepts in the knowledge universe, and the intertwining roles of works, instantiations, and documents. In particular the authors are interested in ontological and epistemological aspects of concepts and in the question to which extent there is a need for natural languages to link concepts to create meaningful patterns. Design/methodology/approach - The authors describe the quest for the smallest elements of knowledge from a historical perspective. They focus on the metaphor of the universe of knowledge and its impact on classification and retrieval of concepts. They outline the major components of an elementary theory of knowledge interaction. Findings - The paper outlines the major components of an elementary theory of knowledge interaction that is based on the structure of knowledge rather than on the content of documents, in which semantics becomes not a matter of synonymous concepts, but rather of coordinating knowledge structures. The evidence is derived from existing empirical research. Originality/value - The paper shifts the bases for knowledge organization from a search for a universal order to an understanding of a universal structure within which many context-dependent orders are possible.
-
Connaway, L.S.; Sievert, M.C.: Comparison of three classification systems for information on health insurance (1996)
0.01
0.00935388 = product of:
0.01870776 = sum of:
0.01870776 = product of:
0.05612328 = sum of:
0.05612328 = weight(_text_:22 in 7242) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05612328 = score(doc=7242,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18132305 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05177952 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 7242, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7242)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 4.1997 21:10:19
-
Belayche, C.: ¬A propos de la classification de Dewey (1997)
0.01
0.00935388 = product of:
0.01870776 = sum of:
0.01870776 = product of:
0.05612328 = sum of:
0.05612328 = weight(_text_:22 in 1171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05612328 = score(doc=1171,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18132305 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05177952 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1171, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1171)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Bulletin d'informations de l'Association des Bibliothecaires Francais. 1997, no.175, S.22-23
-
Lin, W.-Y.C.: ¬The concept and applications of faceted classifications (2006)
0.01
0.00935388 = product of:
0.01870776 = sum of:
0.01870776 = product of:
0.05612328 = sum of:
0.05612328 = weight(_text_:22 in 5083) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05612328 = score(doc=5083,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18132305 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05177952 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5083, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5083)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 27. 5.2007 22:19:35
-
Dahlberg, I.: DIN 32705: the German standard on classification systems : a critical appraisal (1992)
0.01
0.008917191 = product of:
0.017834382 = sum of:
0.017834382 = product of:
0.07133753 = sum of:
0.07133753 = weight(_text_:authors in 2669) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07133753 = score(doc=2669,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2360532 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.05177952 = queryNorm
0.30220953 = fieldWeight in 2669, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2669)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The German standard on the construction and further development of classification systems is introduced with its background. The contents of its 8 chapters is described. A critical appraisal considers (1) the fact that the standard does not openly deal with the optimal form of CS, viz. faceted CS, but treats them as one possibility among others, although the authors seem to have had this kind in mind when recommending the section on steps of CS development and other sections of the standard; (2) that the standard does not give any recommendation on the computerization of the necessary activities in establishing CS; and (3) that a convergence of CS and thesauri in the form of faceted CS and faceted thesauri has not been taken into consideration. - Concludingly some doubts are raised whether a standard would be the best medium to provide recommendations or guidelines for the construction of such systems. More adequate ways for this should be explored
-
Slavic, A.; Cordeiro, M.I.: Core requirements for automation of analytico-synthetic classifications (2004)
0.01
0.008917191 = product of:
0.017834382 = sum of:
0.017834382 = product of:
0.07133753 = sum of:
0.07133753 = weight(_text_:authors in 2651) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07133753 = score(doc=2651,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2360532 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.05177952 = queryNorm
0.30220953 = fieldWeight in 2651, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2651)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The paper analyses the importance of data presentation and modelling and its role in improving the management, use and exchange of analytico-synthetic classifications in automated systems. Inefficiencies, in this respect, hinder the automation of classification systems that offer the possibility of building compound index/search terms. The lack of machine readable data expressing the semantics and structure of a classification vocabulary has negative effects on information management and retrieval, thus restricting the potential of both automated systems and classifications themselves. The authors analysed the data representation structure of three general analytico-synthetic classification systems (BC2-Bliss Bibliographic Classification; BSO-Broad System of Ordering; UDC-Universal Decimal Classification) and put forward some core requirements for classification data representation
-
Gnoli, C.: Naturalism vs pragmatism in knowledge organization (2004)
0.01
0.008917191 = product of:
0.017834382 = sum of:
0.017834382 = product of:
0.07133753 = sum of:
0.07133753 = weight(_text_:authors in 2663) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07133753 = score(doc=2663,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2360532 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.05177952 = queryNorm
0.30220953 = fieldWeight in 2663, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2663)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Several authors remark that categories used in languages, including indexing ones, are affected by cultural biases, and do not reflect reality in an objective way. Hence knowledge organization would essentially be determined by pragmatic factors. However, human categories are connected with the structure of reality through biological bonds, and this allows for a naturalistic approach too. Naturalism has been adopted by Farradane in proposing relational categories, and by Dahlberg and the CRG in applying the theory of integrative levels to general classification schemes. The latter is especially relevant for possible developments in making the structure of schemes independent from disciplines, and in applying it to digital information retrieval.
