Search (10886 results, page 543 of 545)

5.5191957E-4 = product of:
  0.006623035 = sum of:
    0.006623035 = product of:
      0.01324607 = sum of:
        0.01324607 = weight(_text_:22 in 1786) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01324607 = score(doc=1786,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032588977 = queryNorm
            0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 1786, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1786)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)

Date

22. 3.2008 17:56:19

5.5191957E-4 = product of:
  0.006623035 = sum of:
    0.006623035 = product of:
      0.01324607 = sum of:
        0.01324607 = weight(_text_:22 in 1788) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01324607 = score(doc=1788,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032588977 = queryNorm
            0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 1788, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1788)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)

Abstract

Wer wissen will, wie alt ein Wort ist, woher es stammt, welche Bedeutung es ursprünglich hatte und mit welchen anderen Wörtern es zusammenhängt, findet in diesem Nachschlagewerk präzise Angaben über "tó étymon", den "wahren Sinn eines Wortes". In über 8 000 Einträgen gibt das 'Etymologische Wörterbuch des Deutschen' Auskunft über den Grundwortschatz der deutschen Sprache: Herkunft, Entwicklung, Bedeutung und Verwandtschaft von rund 22 000 Wörtern werden erschlossen. Verzeichnet sind das erste Auftreten eines Wortes im Deutschen, verwandte Formen innerhalb des Germanischen, indoeuropäische Wurzeln, kurz die Ursprungsform. Oberregionale Ausdrücke der Umgangssprache fehlen ebensowenig wie fachsprachliche Begriffe oder geläufige Fremdwörter, die in ihre Ursprungssprache zurückverfolgt werden. Bedeutungshinweise verdeutlichen die semantischen Bezüge zwischen Sprach- und Gesellschaftsgeschichte. Ableitungen und Zusammensetzungen eines Stichworts sind mit Angabe ihres Erstbelegs aufgeführt. Innersprachliche Zusammenhänge und lauthistorische Gesetzmäßigkeiten eröffnen sich dadurch dem an Sprache interessierten Leser.

5.5191957E-4 = product of:
  0.006623035 = sum of:
    0.006623035 = product of:
      0.01324607 = sum of:
        0.01324607 = weight(_text_:22 in 2906) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01324607 = score(doc=2906,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032588977 = queryNorm
            0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 2906, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2906)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)

Date

17. 7.1996 9:33:22

5.5191957E-4 = product of:
  0.006623035 = sum of:
    0.006623035 = product of:
      0.01324607 = sum of:
        0.01324607 = weight(_text_:22 in 4054) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01324607 = score(doc=4054,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032588977 = queryNorm
            0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 4054, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=4054)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)

Date

6. 1.2011 11:22:12

5.5191957E-4 = product of:
  0.006623035 = sum of:
    0.006623035 = product of:
      0.01324607 = sum of:
        0.01324607 = weight(_text_:22 in 571) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01324607 = score(doc=571,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032588977 = queryNorm
            0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 571, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=571)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)

Date

13. 1.2013 14:53:22

5.5191957E-4 = product of:
  0.006623035 = sum of:
    0.006623035 = product of:
      0.01324607 = sum of:
        0.01324607 = weight(_text_:22 in 3034) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01324607 = score(doc=3034,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032588977 = queryNorm
            0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 3034, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3034)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)

Date

22. 6.2016 16:08:54

5.5191957E-4 = product of:
  0.006623035 = sum of:
    0.006623035 = product of:
      0.01324607 = sum of:
        0.01324607 = weight(_text_:22 in 3809) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01324607 = score(doc=3809,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032588977 = queryNorm
            0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 3809, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3809)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

5.5191957E-4 = product of:
  0.006623035 = sum of:
    0.006623035 = product of:
      0.01324607 = sum of:
        0.01324607 = weight(_text_:22 in 359) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01324607 = score(doc=359,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032588977 = queryNorm
            0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 359, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=359)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)

Date

22. 9.2021 16:02:03

5.230314E-4 = product of:
  0.0062763765 = sum of:
    0.0062763765 = weight(_text_:internet in 1789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0062763765 = score(doc=1789,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032588977 = queryNorm
        0.0652359 = fieldWeight in 1789, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1789)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)

Content

Die konstituierende Sitzung des Beirats fand am 3. Februar 2003 in der Deutschen Bibliothek Frankfurt am Main statt. Zum Vorsitzenden wurde Herr Dr. Klaus Haller gewählt. Der Beirat betonte die bibliothekspolitische Dimension des Projekts, die u.a. darin gesehen wird, dass die deutschen Bibliotheken in die Lage versetzt werden, ihre Bestände in einem weltweiten "Verbund" nachweisen zu können. Auf der anderen Seite war unstrittig, dass auch die praktische Seite eines Umstiegs nicht vernachlässigt werden darf. Es bestand Einigkeit darin, dass die im Projekt erarbeitete Studie eine solide Grundlage für die politischen Entscheidungsträger bilden und der Ansatz der Studie ergebnisoffen sein soll. Die Studie soll auch Aussagen zur Bedeutung der Erschließung im Unterschied zum Internet und den Suchmaschinen treffen. Der von der Projektbearbeiterin entwickelte Projektplan wurde intensiv diskutiert. Im Einzelnen wurden folgende Arbeitspakete besprochen: - Vergleich der Regelwerke Beim Umstieg sollen vor allem die Konsequenzen im Bereich der Personennamen und ihrer individualisierenden Ansetzungen, der Sprachpräferenzen insbesondere bei den Gebietskörperschaften, der unterschiedlichen Transliterationen sowie der Split entries bei fortlaufenden Sammelwerken berücksichtigt werden. - Vergleich der Formate Neben den hierarchischen Strukturen des MAB-Formats sollen auch die Verknüpfungen zwischen Norm- und Titeldaten untersucht werden. Da die Normdatenhaltung in den lokalen Systemen nicht immer zufriedenstellend ist, soll als Alternative zu den komplexen Verknüpfungsstrukturen geprüft werden, ob moderne Suchmaschinen mit ihren Retrievalmöglichkeiten die Verknüpfungsstrukturen verzichtbar machen können. - Untersuchungen zur Vorgehensweise bei einer Migration Frau Hoffmann erläuterte die verschiedenen Migrationsmodelle. Bereits zu Beginn des Projekts war klar, dass das Ergebnis der Studie nicht unbedingt "Umstieg ja" oder "Umstieg nein" heißen muss, sondern auch Möglichkeiten eines "sanften Umstiegs" aufgezeigt werden sollen. Aus diesem Grund wurden verschiedene Migrationsszenarien entwickelt: Kompletter Umstieg - Katalogabbruch, neuer Katalog - Maschinelle Umsetzung des alten Katalogs von MAB2 nach MARC21 - Abgleich einer MAB-Datenbank mit der Datenbank der LoC und/oder OCLC und Ersetzen von identischen Titeln Teilweiser Umstieg - Nur Umstieg auf MARC21 und Beibehaltung von RAK Kein Umstieg - Verbleib bei RAK und MAB - Aktive Beteiligung an internationalen Entwicklungen und Projekten und späterer Umstieg Der Beirat diskutierte über die weiteren Arbeitspakete des Projektplans: Auswirkungen auf die laufende Katalogisierung - Untersuchung zur Entwicklung und Zukunft von AACR2 und MARC21 sowie anderen bibliothekarischen und bibliographischen Projekten - Kosten eines Umstiegs sowie eines Nicht-Umstiegs - Konsequenzen eines Umstiegs für andere Bibliotheksbereiche - Auswirkungen auf den Benutzer. Die Diskussion machte deutlich, dass der Benutzerbegriff vom Wissenschaftler, der ein Interesse daran hat, dass seine Publikationen weltweit zur Kenntnis genommen werden, bis zum Schüler einer Stadtbücherei reicht - Zeitliche Perspektiven in Abhängigkeit vom jeweiligen Umstiegsszenario Im Anschluss an die Besprechung der einzelnen Arbeitspakete wurden die bisherigen Aktivitäten vorgestellt: Zunächst wurden die im Projektantrag an die DFG genannten Aspekte, unter denen ein Umstieg beleuchtet werden soll, strukturiert und Schwerpunkte gesetzt, da die Begrenzung der Projektdauer auf 18 Monate eine detaillierte Untersuchung aller Einzelaspekte nicht zulässt, so wünschenswert sie auch wäre. Sodann wurde die sachliche und inhaltliche Struktur in einen zeitlichen Ablauf gebracht, damit die einzelnen Aufgabenpakete in einer sinnvollen Reihenfolge, teilweise auch parallel, abgearbeitet werden können. Um die gegenwärtige Situation in den Bibliotheken untersuchen zu können, wurden Bibliotheken, bibliothekarische Gremien und Expertengruppen frühzeitig in die Untersuchungen einbezogen.

5.230314E-4 = product of:
  0.0062763765 = sum of:
    0.0062763765 = weight(_text_:internet in 2073) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0062763765 = score(doc=2073,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032588977 = queryNorm
        0.0652359 = fieldWeight in 2073, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2073)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)

Theme

Internet

5.230314E-4 = product of:
  0.0062763765 = sum of:
    0.0062763765 = weight(_text_:internet in 3884) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0062763765 = score(doc=3884,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032588977 = queryNorm
        0.0652359 = fieldWeight in 3884, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=3884)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST 56(2005) no.10, S.1126-1128 (P.K. Nayar): "How Images Think is an exercise both in philosophical meditation and critical theorizing about media, images, affects, and cognition. Burnett combines the insights of neuroscience with theories of cognition and the computer sciences. He argues that contemporary metaphors - biological or mechanical - about either cognition, images, or computer intelligence severely limit our understanding of the image. He suggests in his introduction that "image" refers to the "complex set of interactions that constitute everyday life in image-worlds" (p. xviii). For Burnett the fact that increasing amounts of intelligence are being programmed into technologies and devices that use images as their main form of interaction and communication-computers, for instance-suggests that images are interfaces, structuring interaction, people, and the environment they share. New technologies are not simply extensions of human abilities and needs-they literally enlarge cultural and social preconceptions of the relationship between body and mind. The flow of information today is part of a continuum, with exceptional events standing as punctuation marks. This flow connects a variety of sources, some of which are continuous - available 24 hours - or "live" and radically alters issues of memory and history. Television and the Internet, notes Burnett, are not simply a simulated world-they are the world, and the distinctions between "natural" and "non-natural" have disappeared. Increasingly, we immerse ourselves in the image, as if we are there. We rarely become conscious of the fact that we are watching images of events-for all perceptioe, cognitive, and interpretive purposes, the image is the event for us. The proximity and distance of viewer from/with the viewed has altered so significantly that the screen is us. However, this is not to suggest that we are simply passive consumers of images. As Burnett points out, painstakingly, issues of creativity are involved in the process of visualization-viewwes generate what they see in the images. This involves the historical moment of viewing-such as viewing images of the WTC bombings-and the act of re-imagining. As Burnett puts it, "the questions about what is pictured and what is real have to do with vantage points [of the viewer] and not necessarily what is in the image" (p. 26). In his second chapter Burnett moves an to a discussion of "imagescapes." Analyzing the analogue-digital programming of images, Burnett uses the concept of "reverie" to describe the viewing experience. The reverie is a "giving in" to the viewing experience, a "state" in which conscious ("I am sitting down an this sofa to watch TV") and unconscious (pleasure, pain, anxiety) processes interact. Meaning emerges in the not-always easy or "clean" process of hybridization. This "enhances" the thinking process beyond the boundaries of either image or subject. Hybridization is the space of intelligence, exchange, and communication.

5.230314E-4 = product of:
  0.0062763765 = sum of:
    0.0062763765 = weight(_text_:internet in 3987) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0062763765 = score(doc=3987,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032588977 = queryNorm
        0.0652359 = fieldWeight in 3987, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=3987)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)

Abstract

Denn Information scheint unendlich verfügbar, zumal in einer überbordenden Medienlandschaft, für jede/n zugänglich und nutzbar, und über Wissen verfügt auch jede/r, so oder so, über welches auch immer. Es lässt sich objektiv grenzenlos erwerben, in Bildungseinrichtungen und Bibliotheken, via Internet und mittels (betrieblicher) Fortbildung, und vieles braucht man auch nicht zu wissen oder will es gar nicht. Eine Interessen- und Lobbypolitik wie noch in der Industriegesellschaft im Antagonismus zwischen Unternehmern und Arbeitnehmern kann es in der neuen Gesellschaftsformation eigentlich auch nicht mehr geben, da Information und Wissen ja keine knappen Ressourcen, eigentlich nur teilweise vermarktbar sind, aber eben demjenigen, der sie verkauft, ebenso bleiben wie dem, der sie kauft. Immer nur die materiellen Seiten an ihnen lassen sich privatisieren und aneignen, entsprechend abschotten und schützen, nicht ihre symbolischen und subjektiven. Mithin suggerieren die kuranten Begriffe potenzielle Gleichheit, mindestens Chancengleichheit für jeden, so dass überkommene strukturelle Antagonismen und Interessenunterschiede früherer Gesellschaftsformation zu verschwinden scheinen. So eignen sich beide Etikette vorzüglich für die "schöne neue Welt", verheißen Positives und Harmonie, Chancen und Wohlfahrt gewissermaßen tendenziell für alle, entsprechend werden sie bereitwillig, weithin schon inflationär verwendet. Und daher fragt auch kaum jemand mehr nach Substanz und empirischen Indikatoren, nach Reichweite und Validität der Begriffe, denn es könnte ihm ja so gehen wie dem Kind im Märchen "Des Kaisers neuer Kleider". Aber auch dieser Vergleich trifft nicht ganz: Denn nichts anzuhaben ist in der neuen, omnipräsenten Medienwelt fast schon ein viel verwendeter professioneller Habitus, zumindest für die Damen, nach den Direktiven und Wünschen der Männer.

5.230314E-4 = product of:
  0.0062763765 = sum of:
    0.0062763765 = weight(_text_:internet in 3993) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0062763765 = score(doc=3993,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032588977 = queryNorm
        0.0652359 = fieldWeight in 3993, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=3993)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)

Theme

Internet

5.230314E-4 = product of:
  0.0062763765 = sum of:
    0.0062763765 = weight(_text_:internet in 822) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0062763765 = score(doc=822,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032588977 = queryNorm
        0.0652359 = fieldWeight in 822, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=822)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)

Footnote

There is only one article in the issue that claims to offer a theory of the scope that discussed by McGrath, and I am sorry that it appears in this issue. Bor-Sheng Tsai's "Theory of Information Genetics" is an almost incomprehensible combination of four different "models" wich names like "Möbius Twist" and "Clipping-Jointing." Tsai starts by posing the question "What is it that makes the `UNIVERSAL' information generating, representation, and transfer happen?" From this ungrammatical beginning, things get rapidly worse. Tsai makes side trips into the history of defining information, offers three-dimensional plots of citation data, a formula for "bonding relationships," hypothetical data an food consumption, sample pages from a web-based "experts directory" and dozens of citations from works which are peripheral to the discussion. The various sections of the article seem to have little to do with one another. I can't believe that the University of Illinois would publish something so poorly-edited. Now I will turn to the dominant, "bibliometric" articles in this issue, in order of their appearance: Judit Bar-Ilan and Bluma Peritz write about "Informetric Theories and Methods for Exploring the Internet." Theirs is a survey of research an patterns of electronic publication, including different ways of sampling, collecting and analyzing data an the Web. Their contribution to the "theory" theme lies in noting that some existing bibliometric laws apply to the Web. William Hood and Concepción Wilson's article, "Solving Problems ... Using Fuzzy Set Theory," demonstrates the widespread applicability of this mathematical tool for library-related problems, such as making decisions about the binding of documents, or improving document retrieval. Ronald Rosseau's piece an "Journal Evaluation" discusses the strength and weaknesses of various indicators for determining impact factors and rankings for journals. His is an exceptionally well-written article that has everything to do with measurement but almost nothing to do with theory, to my way of thinking. "The Matthew Effect for Countries" is the topic of Manfred Bonitz's paper an citations to scientific publications, analyzed by nation of origin. His research indicates that publications from certain countries-such as Switzerland, Denmark, the USA and the UK-receive more than the expected number of citations; correspondingly, some rather large countries like China receive much fewer than might be expected. Bonitz provides an extensive discussion of how the "MEC" measure came about, and what it ments-relating it to efficiency in scientific research. A bonus is his detour into the origins of the Matthew Effect in the Bible, and the subsequent popularization of the name by the sociologist Robert Merton. Wolfgang Glänzel's "Coauthorship patterns and trends in the sciences (1980-1998)" is, as the title implies, another citation analysis. He compares the number of authors an papers in three fields-Biomedical research, Chemistry and Mathematics - at sixyear intervals. Among other conclusions, Glänzel notes that the percentage of publications with four or more authors has been growing in all three fields, and that multiauthored papers are more likely to be cited.

5.230314E-4 = product of:
  0.0062763765 = sum of:
    0.0062763765 = weight(_text_:internet in 2824) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0062763765 = score(doc=2824,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032588977 = queryNorm
        0.0652359 = fieldWeight in 2824, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2824)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)

Footnote

Essential Classification is also an exercise book. Indeed, it contains a number of practical exercises and activities in every chapter, along with suggested answers. Unfortunately, the answers are too often provided without the justifications and explanations that students would no doubt demand. The author has taken great care to explain all technical terms in her text, but formal definitions are also gathered in an extensive 172-term Glossary; appropriately, these terms appear in bold type the first time they are used in the text. A short, very short, annotated bibliography of standard classification textbooks and of manuals for the use of major classification schemes is provided. A detailed 11-page index completes the set of learning aids which will be useful to an audience of students in their effort to grasp the basic concepts of the theory and the practice of document classification in a traditional environment. Essential Classification is a fine textbook. However, this reviewer deplores the fact that it presents only a very "traditional" view of classification, without much reference to newer environments such as the Internet where classification also manifests itself in various forms. In Essential Classification, books are always used as examples, and we have to take the author's word that traditional classification practices and tools can also be applied to other types of documents and elsewhere than in the traditional library. Vanda Broughton writes, for example, that "Subject headings can't be used for physical arrangement" (p. 101), but this is not entirely true. Subject headings can be used for physical arrangement of vertical files, for example, with each folder bearing a simple or complex heading which is then used for internal organization. And if it is true that subject headings cannot be reproduced an the spine of [physical] books (p. 93), the situation is certainly different an the World Wide Web where subject headings as metadata can be most useful in ordering a collection of hot links. The emphasis is also an the traditional paperbased, rather than an the electronic version of classification schemes, with excellent justifications of course. The reality is, however, that supporting organizations (LC, OCLC, etc.) are now providing great quality services online, and that updates are now available only in an electronic format and not anymore on paper. E-based versions of classification schemes could be safely ignored in a theoretical text, but they have to be described and explained in a textbook published in 2005. One last comment: Professor Broughton tends to use the same term, "classification" to represent the process (as in classification is grouping) and the tool (as in constructing a classification, using a classification, etc.). Even in the Glossary where classification is first well-defined as a process, and classification scheme as "a set of classes ...", the definition of classification scheme continues: "the classification consists of a vocabulary (...) and syntax..." (p. 296-297). Such an ambiguous use of the term classification seems unfortunate and unnecessarily confusing in an otherwise very good basic textbook an categorization of concepts and subjects, document organization and subject representation."

5.2035484E-4 = product of:
  0.0062442576 = sum of:
    0.0062442576 = product of:
      0.012488515 = sum of:
        0.012488515 = weight(_text_:22 in 55) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012488515 = score(doc=55,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032588977 = queryNorm
            0.109432176 = fieldWeight in 55, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=55)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)

Date

22. 2.2007 18:56:23
22. 2.2007 19:12:10

5.2035484E-4 = product of:
  0.0062442576 = sum of:
    0.0062442576 = product of:
      0.012488515 = sum of:
        0.012488515 = weight(_text_:22 in 69) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012488515 = score(doc=69,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032588977 = queryNorm
            0.109432176 = fieldWeight in 69, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=69)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)

Classification

327.12 22

DDC

327.12 22

4.59933E-4 = product of:
  0.005519196 = sum of:
    0.005519196 = product of:
      0.011038392 = sum of:
        0.011038392 = weight(_text_:22 in 5929) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011038392 = score(doc=5929,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032588977 = queryNorm
            0.09672529 = fieldWeight in 5929, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=5929)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)

Source

Frankfurter Rundschau. Nr.125 vom 31.5.2001, S.22

4.59933E-4 = product of:
  0.005519196 = sum of:
    0.005519196 = product of:
      0.011038392 = sum of:
        0.011038392 = weight(_text_:22 in 5944) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011038392 = score(doc=5944,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032588977 = queryNorm
            0.09672529 = fieldWeight in 5944, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=5944)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)

Date

22. 7.2006 20:12:41

4.59933E-4 = product of:
  0.005519196 = sum of:
    0.005519196 = product of:
      0.011038392 = sum of:
        0.011038392 = weight(_text_:22 in 8) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011038392 = score(doc=8,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032588977 = queryNorm
            0.09672529 = fieldWeight in 8, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=8)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)

Date

22. 6.2005 9:48:52