Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Universale Facettenklassifikationen"
  • × theme_ss:"Wissensrepräsentation"
  • × type_ss:"a"
  1. Hudon, M.: Facet (2020) 0.02
    0.015078641 = product of:
      0.060314562 = sum of:
        0.060314562 = weight(_text_:digital in 5899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.060314562 = score(doc=5899,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.30507088 = fieldWeight in 5899, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5899)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    S.R. Ranganathan is credited with the introduction of the term "facet" in the field of knowledge organization towards the middle of the twentieth century. Facets have traditionally been used to organize document collections and to express complex subjects. In the digital world, they act as filters to facilitate navigation and improve retrieval. But the popularity of the term does not mean that a definitive characterization of the concept has been established. Indeed, several conceptualizations of the facet co-exist. This article provides an overview of formal and informal definitions found in the literature of knowledge organization, followed by a discussion of four common conceptualizations of the facet: process vs product, nature vs function, object vs subject and organization vs navigation.
  2. Ghosh, S.; Panigrahi, P.: Use of Ranganathan's analytico-synthetic approach in developing a domain ontology in library and information science (2015) 0.01
    0.00957139 = product of:
      0.03828556 = sum of:
        0.03828556 = weight(_text_:library in 2798) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03828556 = score(doc=2798,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.29050803 = fieldWeight in 2798, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2798)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Classification is the basis of knowledge organization. Ontology, a comparatively new concept used as a tool for knowledge organization, establishes connections between terms and concepts enhancing the scope and usefulness of library classification. Ranganathan had invented the strong theory of the analytico-synthetic method in classification and devised Colon Classification. In this study a domain ontology on library and information science has been developed by implementing Raganathan's faceted approach of classification. The hierarchical relationships among terms have been established primarily keeping conformity with that of Ranganathan's Colon Classification (7th edition). But to accommodate new vocabularies, DDC 23rd edition and UDC Standard edition are consulted. The Protégé ontology editor has been used. The study carefully examines the steps in which the analytico-synthetic method have been followed. Ranganathan's Canon of Characteristics and its relevant Canons have been followed for defining the class-subclass hierarchy. It concludes by identifying the drawbacks as well as the merits faced while developing the ontology. This paper proves the relevance and importance of Ranganathan's philosophy in developing ontology based knowledge organization.
    Source
    Annals of library and information studies. 62(2015) no.4, S.274-280
  3. Gnoli, C.; Pullman, T.; Cousson, P.; Merli, G.; Szostak, R.: Representing the structural elements of a freely faceted classification (2011) 0.01
    0.0061664553 = product of:
      0.024665821 = sum of:
        0.024665821 = product of:
          0.049331643 = sum of:
            0.049331643 = weight(_text_:project in 4825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.049331643 = score(doc=4825,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.23317845 = fieldWeight in 4825, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4825)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Freely faceted classifications allow for free combination of concepts across all knowledge domains, and for sorting of the resulting compound classmarks. Starting from work by the Classification Research Group, the Integrative Levels Classification (ILC) project has produced a first edition of a general freely faceted scheme. The system is managed as a MySQL database, and can be browsed through a Web interface. The ILC database structure provides a case for identifying and representing the structural elements of any freely faceted classification. These belong to both the notational and the verbal planes. Notational elements include: arrays, chains, deictics, facets, foci, place of definition of foci, examples of combinations, subclasses of a faceted class, groupings, related classes; verbal elements include: main caption, synonyms, descriptions, included terms, related terms, notes. Encoding of some of these elements in an international mark-up format like SKOS can be problematic, especially as this does not provide for faceted structures, although approximate SKOS equivalents are identified for most of them.
  4. Giri, K.; Gokhale, P.: Developing a banking service ontology using Protégé, an open source software (2015) 0.00
    0.004785695 = product of:
      0.01914278 = sum of:
        0.01914278 = weight(_text_:library in 2793) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01914278 = score(doc=2793,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.14525402 = fieldWeight in 2793, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2793)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Annals of library and information studies. 62(2015) no.4, S.281-285