Search (217 results, page 1 of 11)

  • × theme_ss:"Klassifikationstheorie: Elemente / Struktur"
  1. Mills, J.; Broughton, V.: Bliss Bibliographic Classification : Introduction and auxiliary schedules (1992) 0.07 
    0.06605669 = product of:
  0.19817007 = sum of:
    0.19036543 = product of:
      0.5710963 = sum of:
        0.5710963 = weight(_text_:bliss in 821) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.5710963 = score(doc=821,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.34138238 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04772181 = queryNorm
            1.6728933 = fieldWeight in 821, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=821)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.007804629 = weight(_text_:in in 821) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007804629 = score(doc=821,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06491381 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04772181 = queryNorm
        0.120230645 = fieldWeight in 821, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=821)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Footnote
    Diese Einführung hat den Umfang einen kleinen Lehrbuches. - Das eigentliche Klassifikationssystem erscheint in Lieferungen
    LCSH
    Bliss Bibliographic classification
    PRECIS
    Documents / Subject classification schemes: Bliss, Henry Evelyn / Bliss bibliographic classification / Texts
    Subject
    Bliss Bibliographic classification
    Documents / Subject classification schemes: Bliss, Henry Evelyn / Bliss bibliographic classification / Texts
  2. Vukadin, A.; Slavic, A.: Challenges of facet analysis and concept placement in Universal Classifications : the example of architecture in UDC (2014) 0.05 
    0.046818748 = product of:
  0.093637496 = sum of:
    0.053963535 = product of:
      0.1618906 = sum of:
        0.1618906 = weight(_text_:bliss in 1428) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1618906 = score(doc=1428,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.34138238 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04772181 = queryNorm
            0.4742207 = fieldWeight in 1428, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1428)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.020277021 = weight(_text_:in in 1428) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020277021 = score(doc=1428,freq=24.0), product of:
        0.06491381 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04772181 = queryNorm
        0.3123684 = fieldWeight in 1428, product of:
          4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
            24.0 = termFreq=24.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1428)
    0.019396938 = product of:
      0.038793877 = sum of:
        0.038793877 = weight(_text_:22 in 1428) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038793877 = score(doc=1428,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16711365 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04772181 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(3/6)
    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.
    Series
    Advances in knowledge organization; vol. 14
    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
  3. Bliss, H.E.: ¬A bibliographic classification : principles and definitions (1985) 0.05 
    0.04558985 = product of:
  0.13676955 = sum of:
    0.11931786 = product of:
      0.35795358 = sum of:
        0.35795358 = weight(_text_:bliss in 3621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.35795358 = score(doc=3621,freq=22.0), product of:
            0.34138238 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04772181 = queryNorm
            1.0485414 = fieldWeight in 3621, product of:
              4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
                22.0 = termFreq=22.0
              7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3621)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.017451683 = weight(_text_:in in 3621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017451683 = score(doc=3621,freq=40.0), product of:
        0.06491381 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04772181 = queryNorm
        0.26884392 = fieldWeight in 3621, product of:
          6.3245554 = tf(freq=40.0), with freq of:
            40.0 = termFreq=40.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3621)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    Henry Evelyn Bliss (1870-1955) devoted several decades of his life to the study of classification and the development of the Bibliographic Classification scheme while serving as a librarian in the College of the City of New York. In the course of the development of the Bibliographic Classification, Bliss developed a body of classification theory published in a number of articles and books, among which the best known are The Organization of Knowledge and the System of the Sciences (1929), Organization of Knowledge in Libraries and the Subject Approach to Books (1933; 2nd ed., 1939), and the lengthy preface to A Bibliographic Classification (Volumes 1-2, 1940; 2nd ed., 1952). In developing the Bibliographic Classification, Bliss carefully established its philosophical and theoretical basis, more so than was attempted by the makers of other classification schemes, with the possible exception of S. R. Ranganathan (q.v.) and his Colon Classification. The basic principles established by Bliss for the Bibliographic Classification are: consensus, collocation of related subjects, subordination of special to general and gradation in specialty, and the relativity of classes and of classification (hence alternative location and alternative treatment). In the preface to the schedules of A Bibliographic Classification, Bliss spells out the general principles of classification as weIl as principles specifically related to his scheme. The first volume of the schedules appeared in 1940. In 1952, he issued a second edition of the volume with a rewritten preface, from which the following excerpt is taken, and with the addition of a "Concise Synopsis," which is also included here to illustrate the principles of classificatory structure. In the excerpt reprinted below, Bliss discusses the correlation between classes, concepts, and terms, as weIl as the hierarchical structure basic to his classification scheme. In his discussion of cross-classification, Bliss recognizes the "polydimensional" nature of classification and the difficulties inherent in the two-dimensional approach which is characteristic of linear classification. This is one of the earliest works in which the multidimensional nature of classification is recognized. The Bibliographic Classification did not meet with great success in the United States because the Dewey Decimal Classification and the Library of Congress Classification were already weIl ensconced in American libraries by then. Nonetheless, it attracted considerable attention in the British Commonwealth and elsewhere in the world. A committee was formed in Britain which later became the Bliss Classification Association. A faceted edition of the scheme has been in preparation under the direction of J. Mills and V. Broughton. Several parts of this new edition, entitled Bliss Bibliographic Classification, have been published.
    Footnote
    Original in: Bliss, H.E.: A bibliographic classification extended by systematic auxuliary schedules for composite specification and notation. vols 1-2. 2nd ed. New York: Wilson 1952. S.3-11.
  4. Lorenz, B.: Zur Theorie und Terminologie der bibliothekarischen Klassifikation (2018) 0.04 
    0.039170265 = product of:
  0.07834053 = sum of:
    0.011037413 = weight(_text_:in in 4339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011037413 = score(doc=4339,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06491381 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04772181 = queryNorm
        0.17003182 = fieldWeight in 4339, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4339)
    0.041440528 = weight(_text_:und in 4339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041440528 = score(doc=4339,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.105769046 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04772181 = queryNorm
        0.39180204 = fieldWeight in 4339, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4339)
    0.025862586 = product of:
      0.05172517 = sum of:
        0.05172517 = weight(_text_:22 in 4339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05172517 = score(doc=4339,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16711365 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04772181 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(3/6)
    Abstract
    Der Beitrag skizziert die Grundlagen der Arbeit mit Klassifikationen in Bibliotheken und erläutert die Grundbegriffe der bibliothekarischen Klassifikationstheorie. Schwerpunkte bilden die Ordnungsprinzipien und Strukturierungsmittel von Klassifikationen sowie die verschiedenen Klassifikationstypologien. Dabei werden vorzugsweise Beispiele aus Klassifikationen verwendet, die im deutschen Sprachraum verbreitet sind.
    Pages
    S.1-22
    Series
    Bibliotheks- und Informationspraxis; 53
    Source
    Klassifikationen in Bibliotheken: Theorie - Anwendung - Nutzen. Hrsg.: H. Alex, G. Bee u. U. Junger
  5. Hjoerland, B.: Theories of knowledge organization - theories of knowledge (2017) 0.03 
    0.03285964 = product of:
  0.06571928 = sum of:
    0.0068290504 = weight(_text_:in in 3494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0068290504 = score(doc=3494,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06491381 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04772181 = queryNorm
        0.10520181 = fieldWeight in 3494, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3494)
    0.036260463 = weight(_text_:und in 3494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.036260463 = score(doc=3494,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.105769046 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04772181 = queryNorm
        0.34282678 = fieldWeight in 3494, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3494)
    0.022629762 = product of:
      0.045259524 = sum of:
        0.045259524 = weight(_text_:22 in 3494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045259524 = score(doc=3494,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16711365 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04772181 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(3/6)
    Pages
    S.22-36
    Series
    Fortschritte in der Wissensorganisation; Bd.13
    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
  6. Grimaldi, T.: ¬L'indicizzazione dal punto di vista cognitivo (II) (1996) 0.03 
    0.028489796 = product of:
  0.08546939 = sum of:
    0.071951374 = product of:
      0.21585411 = sum of:
        0.21585411 = weight(_text_:bliss in 992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.21585411 = score(doc=992,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.34138238 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04772181 = queryNorm
            0.63229424 = fieldWeight in 992, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=992)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.013518016 = weight(_text_:in in 992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013518016 = score(doc=992,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06491381 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04772181 = queryNorm
        0.2082456 = fieldWeight in 992, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=992)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    In relation to indexing, one of the chief implications of cognitive epistemology is the necessity for redefining knowledge representation concepts for information filing and retrieval purposes. Such a redefinition involves abandoning the traditional, hierarchical, closed-structure classification model. Considers the following in detail: a semiotic critique of classification principles; Ranganathan's classification theory; Ranganathan and cognitive epistemology; and some reflections on the DDC and the Bliss Bibliographic Classification
    Content
    T.1 in: Bibliotecario 1995, no.1, S.277-301
  7. Bury, S.: Comparison of classification schedules for libraries (1980) 0.03 
    0.026585337 = product of:
  0.07975601 = sum of:
    0.071951374 = product of:
      0.21585411 = sum of:
        0.21585411 = weight(_text_:bliss in 1603) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.21585411 = score(doc=1603,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.34138238 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04772181 = queryNorm
            0.63229424 = fieldWeight in 1603, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1603)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.007804629 = weight(_text_:in in 1603) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007804629 = score(doc=1603,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06491381 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04772181 = queryNorm
        0.120230645 = fieldWeight in 1603, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1603)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    Discusses the basic criteria for comparison of classification for libraries. Identifies a set of intellectual criteria, derived from the general theory of library classification as expounded by Dewey, Bliss, and Ranganathan. Compares LC, DC, and BC in relation criteria namely - order, university, hospitality, adaptability, terminology, relationship, synthesis, notational features - simplicity, brevity, expressiveness, specifity, synonymity, flexibility, correlation, case of use, revision and practical use. Highlights the value of comparative studies among classification schemes
  8. DIN 32705: Klassifikationssysteme: Erstellung und Weiterentwicklung von Klassifikationssystemen (1987) 0.02 
    0.024703283 = product of:
  0.074109845 = sum of:
    0.020277021 = weight(_text_:in in 1653) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020277021 = score(doc=1653,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06491381 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04772181 = queryNorm
        0.3123684 = fieldWeight in 1653, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1653)
    0.053832825 = weight(_text_:und in 1653) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.053832825 = score(doc=1653,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.105769046 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04772181 = queryNorm
        0.5089658 = fieldWeight in 1653, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1653)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Footnote
    Vgl. zur Einführung in die Norm auch die Beiträge von W. Gödert: Bibliothekarische Klassifikationssysteme ... in: Bibliothek: Forschung und Praxis 11(1987) und I. Dahlberg: DIN 32705: ... in: International classification 19(1992)
  9. Maniez, J.: ¬Des classifications aux thesaurus : du bon usage des facettes (1999) 0.02 
    0.023291424 = product of:
  0.06987427 = sum of:
    0.031080395 = weight(_text_:und in 6404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031080395 = score(doc=6404,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.105769046 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04772181 = queryNorm
        0.29385152 = fieldWeight in 6404, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6404)
    0.038793877 = product of:
      0.07758775 = sum of:
        0.07758775 = weight(_text_:22 in 6404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07758775 = score(doc=6404,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16711365 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04772181 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Date
    1. 8.1996 22:01:00
    Theme
    Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
  10. Maniez, J.: ¬Du bon usage des facettes : des classifications aux thésaurus (1999) 0.02 
    0.023291424 = product of:
  0.06987427 = sum of:
    0.031080395 = weight(_text_:und in 3773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031080395 = score(doc=3773,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.105769046 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04772181 = queryNorm
        0.29385152 = fieldWeight in 3773, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3773)
    0.038793877 = product of:
      0.07758775 = sum of:
        0.07758775 = weight(_text_:22 in 3773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07758775 = score(doc=3773,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16711365 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04772181 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Date
    1. 8.1996 22:01:00
    Theme
    Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
  11. Broughton, V.: Faceted classification as a basis for knowledge organization in a digital environment : the Bliss Bibliographic Classification as a model for vocabulary management and the creation of multi-dimensional knowledge structures (2001) 0.02 
    0.022824842 = product of:
  0.06847452 = sum of:
    0.06359663 = product of:
      0.19078988 = sum of:
        0.19078988 = weight(_text_:bliss in 5895) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.19078988 = score(doc=5895,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.34138238 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04772181 = queryNorm
            0.5588744 = fieldWeight in 5895, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5895)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.0048778933 = weight(_text_:in in 5895) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0048778933 = score(doc=5895,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06491381 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04772181 = queryNorm
        0.07514416 = fieldWeight in 5895, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5895)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    Broughton is one of the key people working on the second edition of the Bliss Bibliographic Classification (BC2). Her article has a brief, informative history of facets, then discusses semantic vs. syntactic relationships, standard facets used by Ranganathan and the Classification Research Group, facet analysis and citation order, and how to build subject indexes out of faceted classifications, all with occasional reference to digital environments and hypertext, but never with any specifics. It concludes by saying of faceted classification that the "capacity which it has to create highly sophisticated structures for the accommodation of complex objects suggests that it is worth investigation as an organizational tool for digital materials, and that the results of such investigation would be knowledge structures of unparalleled utility and elegance." How to build them is left to the reader, but this article provides an excellent starting point. It includes an example that shows how general concepts can be applied to a small set of documents and subjects, and how terms can be adapted to suit the material and users
  12. Mills, J.: Faceted classification and logical division in information retrieval (2004) 0.02 
    0.022767186 = product of:
  0.06830156 = sum of:
    0.053963535 = product of:
      0.1618906 = sum of:
        0.1618906 = weight(_text_:bliss in 831) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1618906 = score(doc=831,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.34138238 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04772181 = queryNorm
            0.4742207 = fieldWeight in 831, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=831)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.01433802 = weight(_text_:in in 831) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01433802 = score(doc=831,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.06491381 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04772181 = queryNorm
        0.22087781 = fieldWeight in 831, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=831)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    The main object of the paper is to demonstrate in detail the role of classification in information retrieval (IR) and the design of classificatory structures by the application of logical division to all forms of the content of records, subject and imaginative. The natural product of such division is a faceted classification. The latter is seen not as a particular kind of library classification but the only viable form enabling the locating and relating of information to be optimally predictable. A detailed exposition of the practical steps in facet analysis is given, drawing on the experience of the new Bliss Classification (BC2). The continued existence of the library as a highly organized information store is assumed. But, it is argued, it must acknowledge the relevance of the revolution in library classification that has taken place. It considers also how alphabetically arranged subject indexes may utilize controlled use of categorical (generically inclusive) and syntactic relations to produce similarly predictable locating and relating systems for IR.
    Footnote
    Artikel in einem Themenheft: The philosophy of information
  13. Broughton, V.: Faceted classification as a basis for knowledge organization in a digital environment : the Bliss Bibliographic Classification as a model for vocabulary management and the creation of multidimensional knowledge structures (2003) 0.02 
    0.022350766 = product of:
  0.0670523 = sum of:
    0.053963535 = product of:
      0.1618906 = sum of:
        0.1618906 = weight(_text_:bliss in 2631) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1618906 = score(doc=2631,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.34138238 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04772181 = queryNorm
            0.4742207 = fieldWeight in 2631, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2631)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.013088763 = weight(_text_:in in 2631) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013088763 = score(doc=2631,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06491381 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04772181 = queryNorm
        0.20163295 = fieldWeight in 2631, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2631)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    The paper examines the way in which classification schemes can be applied to the organization of digital resources. The case is argued for the particular suitability of schemes based an faceted principles for the organization of complex digital objects. Details are given of a co-operative project between the School of Library Archive & Information Studies, University College London, and the United Kingdom Higher Education gateways Arts and Humanities Data Service and Humbul, in which a faceted knowledge structure is being developed for the indexing and display of digital materials within a new combined humanities portal.
    Series
    Advances in knowledge organization; vol.8
    Source
    Challenges in knowledge representation and organization for the 21st century: Integration of knowledge across boundaries. Proceedings of the 7th ISKO International Conference Granada, Spain, July 10-13, 2002. Ed.: M. López-Huertas
  14. Soergel, D.E.: Klassifikationssysteme und Thesauri : Eine Anleitung zur Herstellung von Klassifikationssystemen und Thesauri im Bereich der Dokumentation (1969) 0.02 
    0.021952694 = product of:
  0.06585808 = sum of:
    0.011037413 = weight(_text_:in in 2020) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011037413 = score(doc=2020,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06491381 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04772181 = queryNorm
        0.17003182 = fieldWeight in 2020, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2020)
    0.054820664 = weight(_text_:und in 2020) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.054820664 = score(doc=2020,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.105769046 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04772181 = queryNorm
        0.51830536 = fieldWeight in 2020, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2020)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Content
    Überblick über Aufgaben und Aufbau eines Thesaurus. Aufwand für Herstellung von Thesauri. Begriffe und Begriffsbenennungen. Klassifikationssystem und Thesaurus und ihre Funktionen in einem Dokumentationssystem. Thesaurus-Struktur. Thesaurus-Format. Arbeitsablauf der Thesaurus-Herstellung. Regeln für Begriffsbenennungen, Rechtschreibung u.ä. Weiterentwicklung von Thesauri. Thesauri als Grundlage für kooperative Dokumentation.
    Footnote
    Rez. in: ZfBB 18(1970) S.130-133 (L. Bösing)
    Theme
    Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
  15. Slavic, A.; Cordeiro, M.I.: Core requirements for automation of analytico-synthetic classifications (2004) 0.02 
    0.02189016 = product of:
  0.065670475 = sum of:
    0.053963535 = product of:
      0.1618906 = sum of:
        0.1618906 = weight(_text_:bliss in 2651) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1618906 = score(doc=2651,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.34138238 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04772181 = queryNorm
            0.4742207 = fieldWeight in 2651, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2651)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.011706944 = weight(_text_:in in 2651) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011706944 = score(doc=2651,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06491381 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04772181 = queryNorm
        0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 2651, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2651)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    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
    Series
    Advances in knowledge organization; vol.9
  16. Olson, H.A.: Wind and rain and dark of night : classification in scientific discourse communities (2008) 0.02 
    0.02189016 = product of:
  0.065670475 = sum of:
    0.053963535 = product of:
      0.1618906 = sum of:
        0.1618906 = weight(_text_:bliss in 2270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1618906 = score(doc=2270,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.34138238 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04772181 = queryNorm
            0.4742207 = fieldWeight in 2270, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2270)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.011706944 = weight(_text_:in in 2270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011706944 = score(doc=2270,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06491381 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04772181 = queryNorm
        0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 2270, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2270)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Content
    Classifications of natural phenomena demonstrate the applicability of discourse analysis in finding the importance of concepts such as warrant for categorization and classification. Temperature scales provide a body of official literature for close consideration. Official documents of the International Bureau of Weights and Measures (BIPM) reveal the reasoning behind choices affecting these standards. A more cursory scrutiny of the Saffir-Simpson Scale through scholarly publications and documentation from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (KIST) indicates the potential of this form of analysis. The same holds true for an examination of the definition of what is a planet as determined by the International Astronomical Union. As Sayers, Richardson, and Bliss have indicated, there seem to be principles and a reliance on context that bridge the differences between natural and artificial, scientific and bibliographic classifications.
    Series
    Advances in knowledge organization; vol.11
    Source
    Culture and identity in knowledge organization: Proceedings of the Tenth International ISKO Conference 5-8 August 2008, Montreal, Canada. Ed. by Clément Arsenault and Joseph T. Tennis
  17. Kumar, K.: Theory of classification (1985) 0.02 
    0.019939002 = product of:
  0.059817005 = sum of:
    0.053963535 = product of:
      0.1618906 = sum of:
        0.1618906 = weight(_text_:bliss in 2069) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1618906 = score(doc=2069,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.34138238 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04772181 = queryNorm
            0.4742207 = fieldWeight in 2069, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2069)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.005853472 = weight(_text_:in in 2069) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005853472 = score(doc=2069,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06491381 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04772181 = queryNorm
        0.09017298 = fieldWeight in 2069, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2069)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    This book provides a coherent account of the theory of classification. It discusses the contributions made by theoreticians like E.C. Richardson, J.B. Brown, W. Hulme, W.C. Berwick Sayers, H.E. Bliss and S.R. Ranganathan. However, the theory put forward by S.R. Ranganathan predominates the whole book because his contribution is far more than anybody else's. Five major schemes - DDC, UDC, LCC, CC, and BC - have also been discussed. Library classification is a specialized area of study. In recent years, library classification has become a vast and complicated field of study using highly technical terminology. A special attempt has been made to provide descriptions as simple and direct as could be possible. To illustrate the theory of classification, large number of examples have been given from all major schemes so that an average student ould also grasp the concepts easily. This book has been especially written to meet the requirements of students, preparing for their library science, documentation, information science diplomas and degrees.
  18. Franz, S.; Lopatka, T.; Kunze, G.; Meyn, N.; Strupler, N.: Un/Doing Classification : Bibliothekarische Klassifikationssysteme zwischen Universalitätsanspruch und reduktionistischer Wissensorganisation (2022) 0.02 
    0.01912311 = product of:
  0.057369333 = sum of:
    0.011037413 = weight(_text_:in in 675) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011037413 = score(doc=675,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06491381 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04772181 = queryNorm
        0.17003182 = fieldWeight in 675, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=675)
    0.04633192 = weight(_text_:und in 675) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04633192 = score(doc=675,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.105769046 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04772181 = 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)
  0.33333334 = 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.
    Footnote
    Beitrag in enem Themenheft 'Critical Library Perspectives'.
  19. Gödert, W.: Bibliothekarische Klassifikationssysteme und on-line-Kataloge : Grundlagen und Anwendungen (1987) 0.02 
    0.019016596 = product of:
  0.057049785 = sum of:
    0.015609258 = weight(_text_:in in 4576) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015609258 = score(doc=4576,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06491381 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04772181 = queryNorm
        0.24046129 = fieldWeight in 4576, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4576)
    0.041440528 = weight(_text_:und in 4576) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041440528 = score(doc=4576,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.105769046 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04772181 = queryNorm
        0.39180204 = fieldWeight in 4576, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4576)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    In diesem Beitrag beabsichtigen wir, einen Überblick über den derzeitigen Stand der bibliothekarischen Klassifikationstheorie zu geben. Die Darstellung ist angelehnt an die 1985 erschienene Norm DIN 32 705,Erstellung und Weiterentwicklung von Klassifikationssystemen', stellt jedoch die Problematik bibliothekarischer Klassifikationssysteme in den Vordergrund. In einem zweiten Teil beschäftigen wir uns mit Problemen von Klassifikationssystemen in typischen bibliothekarischen Anwendungsbereichen. Der Schwerpunkt liegt dabei auf dem Online-Katalog; es wird ein Vorschlag zur Verwendung von Facettenklassifikationen diskutiert. Abschließend werden Fragen der kooperativen klassifikatorischen Inhaltserschließung gestreift.
    Source
    Bibliothek: Forschung und Praxis. 11(1987) H.2, S.152-166
  20. Hjoerland, B.: Facet analysis : the logical approach to knowledge organization (2013) 0.02 
    0.018625638 = product of:
  0.05587691 = sum of:
    0.04496961 = product of:
      0.13490883 = sum of:
        0.13490883 = weight(_text_:bliss in 2720) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13490883 = score(doc=2720,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.34138238 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04772181 = queryNorm
            0.3951839 = fieldWeight in 2720, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2720)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.010907302 = weight(_text_:in in 2720) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010907302 = score(doc=2720,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06491381 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04772181 = queryNorm
        0.16802745 = fieldWeight in 2720, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2720)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    The facet-analytic paradigm is probably the most distinct approach to knowledge organization within Library and Information Science, and in many ways it has dominated what has be termed "modern classification theory". It was mainly developed by S.R. Ranganathan and the British Classification Research Group, but it is mostly based on principles of logical division developed more than two millennia ago. Colon Classification (CC) and Bliss 2 (BC2) are among the most important systems developed on this theoretical basis, but it has also influenced the development of other systems, such as the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) and is also applied in many websites. It still has a strong position in the field and it is the most explicit and "pure" theoretical approach to knowledge organization (KO) (but it is not by implication necessarily also the most important one). The strength of this approach is its logical principles and the way it provides structures in knowledge organization systems (KOS). The main weaknesses are (1) its lack of empirical basis and (2) its speculative ordering of knowledge without basis in the development or influence of theories and socio-historical studies. It seems to be based on the problematic assumption that relations between concepts are a priori and not established by the development of models, theories and laws.

Authors

Years

Languages

Types

  • a 187
  • m 23
  • el 8
  • s 4
  • n 2
  • b 1
  • d 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications