Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Batley, S."
  • × type_ss:"m"
  1. Welsh, A.; Batley, S.: Practical cataloguing : AACR, RDA and MARC 21 (2012) 0.00 
    0.0010663308 = product of:
  0.0021326616 = sum of:
    0.0021326616 = product of:
      0.0042653233 = sum of:
        0.0042653233 = weight(_text_:s in 575) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0042653233 = score(doc=575,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.04100075 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03771094 = queryNorm
            0.10403037 = fieldWeight in 575, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=575)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Footnote
    Rez. in: BuB 64(2012) H.10, S.716-717 (H. Wiesenmüller)
    Pages
    XVI, 217 S
  2. Batley, S.: Information architecture for information professionals (2007) 0.00 
    5.331654E-4 = product of:
  0.0010663308 = sum of:
    0.0010663308 = product of:
      0.0021326616 = sum of:
        0.0021326616 = weight(_text_:s in 5033) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0021326616 = score(doc=5033,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.04100075 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03771094 = queryNorm
            0.052015185 = fieldWeight in 5033, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=5033)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Footnote
    Rez. in: Mitt. VÖB 60(2007) H.2, S.70-74 (O. Oberhauser): "In unseren Breiten ist der Begriff "information architecture" (IA) noch nicht sehr geläufig. Zwar existiert bereits das Äquivalent "Informationsarchitektur - so weist nicht nur die deutschsprachige Wikipedia einen entsprechenden Eintrag auf, sondern man findet auch im Dreiländerkatalog mittels Titelwortsuche "ungefähr 12" Treffer dazu -, doch wer aus unseren Kreisen vermag den Begriffsumfang anzugeben, den Terminus zu erläutern bzw. abzugrenzen? Haben wir es mit einem Modebegriff zu tun? Mit einem Quasi-Synonym zu bestehenden Begriffen wie Informations- oder Wissensorganisation? Wurden gar Klassifikation bzw. Thesaurus - eben erst zu "Taxonomien" umgemodelt - schon wieder einmal neu erfunden oder entdeckt? Geht man dem Terminus "information architecture" nach, so erfährt man, vielleicht mit einem gewissen Erstaunen, zum Beispiel folgendes: - der Begriff wurde bereits 1975 von dem Architekten und Graphikdesigner Richard Wurman geprägt, der sich damit auf eine bessere und benutzerfreundlichere, von architektonischen Prinzipien inspirierte Gestaltung von Informationen bezog; - der Terminus setzte sich allerdings erst mit der Publikation des Buches der aus dem bibliothekarischen Kontext stammenden Autoren Rosenfeld und Morville (1998, soeben in dritter Auflage erschienen) sowie einer ASIS&T-Tagung zur Definition von IA (2000) in breiteren Kreisen durch; - spätestens mit der Publikation von "Information architects" hat Wurman auch diesen, eine Tätigkeit bzw. einen Beruf beschreibenden Terminus etabliert; - seit 2002 besteht das "Information Architecture Institute" (IIA), eine Non-Profit-Organisation zur Entwicklung und Förderung von IA, mit bereits über 1000 Mitgliedern in 60 Staaten und einer Website in acht Sprachen; - (amerikanische) Universitäten haben bereits mit der Etablierung von IA-Studiengängen bzw. Vertiefungsrichtungen (etwa im Fach Bibliotheks- und Informationswissenschaft) begonnen.
    Pages
    xix, 212 S
  3. Batley, S.: Classification in theory and practice (2005) 0.00 
    4.925171E-4 = product of:
  9.850342E-4 = sum of:
    9.850342E-4 = product of:
      0.0019700683 = sum of:
        0.0019700683 = weight(_text_:s in 1170) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0019700683 = score(doc=1170,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.04100075 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03771094 = queryNorm
            0.048049565 = fieldWeight in 1170, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1170)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Footnote
    Rez. in: KO 31(2005), no.4, S.257-258 (B.H. Kwasnik): "According to the author, there have been many books that address the general topic of cataloging and indexing, but relatively few that focus solely an classification. This Compact and clearly written book promises to "redress the balance," and it does. From the outset the author identifies this as a textbook - one that provides theoretical underpinnings, but has as its main goal the provision of "practical advice and the promotion of practical skills" (p. vii). This is a book for the student, or for the practitioner who would like to learn about other applied bibliographic classification systems, and it considers classification as a pragmatic solution to a pragmatic problem: that of organizing materials in a collection. It is not aimed at classification researchers who study the nature of classification per se, nor at those whose primary interest is in classification as a manifestation of human cultural, social, and political values. Having said that, the author's systematic descriptions provide an exceptionally lucid and conceptually grounded description of the prevalent bibliographic classification schemes as they exist, and thus, the book Could serve as a baseline for further comparative analyses or discussions by anyone pursuing such investigations. What makes this book so appealing, even to someone who has immersed herself in this area for many years, as a practicing librarian, a teacher, and a researcher? I especially liked the conceptual framework that supported the detailed descriptions. The author defines and provides examples of the fundamental concepts of notation and the types of classifications, and then develops the notions of conveying order, brevity and simplicity, being memorable, expressiveness, flexibility and hospitality. These basic terms are then used throughout to analyze and comment an the classifications described in the various chapters: DDC, LCC, UDC, and some well-chosen examples of facetted schemes (Colon, Bliss, London Classification of Business Studies, and a hypothetical library of photographs).
    Weitere Rez. in: Mitt. VÖB 59(2006) H.1, S.58-60 (O. Oberhauser).
    Pages
    XI, 181 S

Years

Themes

Subjects

Classifications