Search (34 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × author_ss:"Gnoli, C."
  1. Gnoli, C.: Boundaries and overlaps of disciplines in Bloch's methodology of historical knowledge (2014) 0.07
    0.07314037 = product of:
      0.14628074 = sum of:
        0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 1414) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01029941 = score(doc=1414,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 1414, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1414)
        0.13598132 = sum of:
          0.094997585 = weight(_text_:organization in 1414) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.094997585 = score(doc=1414,freq=10.0), product of:
              0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                0.050415643 = queryNorm
              0.5284991 = fieldWeight in 1414, product of:
                3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                  10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1414)
          0.04098374 = weight(_text_:22 in 1414) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.04098374 = score(doc=1414,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.050415643 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1414, 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=1414)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Marc Bloch's famous methodological essay, The Historian's Craft, contains many relevant considerations on knowledge organization. These have been selected and grouped into four main themes: terminology problems in history; principles for the organization of historical knowledge, with special reference to the genetic principle; sources of historical information, to be found not only in archives but also in very different media and contexts; and the nature and boundaries of history as a discipline. Analysis of them shows that knowledge organization is an important part of historians' work, and suggests that it can be especially fruitful when a cross-medial, interdisciplinary approach is adopted.
    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
  2. Gnoli, C.: Classifying phenomena : part 4: themes and rhemes (2018) 0.05
    0.046883676 = product of:
      0.09376735 = sum of:
        0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 4152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01029941 = score(doc=4152,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4152, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4152)
        0.083467945 = sum of:
          0.042484205 = weight(_text_:organization in 4152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.042484205 = score(doc=4152,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                0.050415643 = queryNorm
              0.23635197 = fieldWeight in 4152, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4152)
          0.04098374 = weight(_text_:22 in 4152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.04098374 = score(doc=4152,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.050415643 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4152, 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=4152)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    This is the fourth in a series of papers on classification based on phenomena instead of disciplines. Together with types, levels and facets that have been discussed in the previous parts, themes and rhemes are further structural components of such a classification. In a statement or in a longer document, a base theme and several particular themes can be identified. Base theme should be cited first in a classmark, followed by particular themes, each with its own facets. In some cases, rhemes can also be expressed, that is new information provided about a theme, converting an abstract statement ("wolves, affected by cervids") into a claim that some thing actually occurs ("wolves are affected by cervids"). In the Integrative Levels Classification rhemes can be expressed by special deictic classes, including those for actual specimens, anaphoras, unknown values, conjunctions and spans, whole universe, anthropocentric favoured classes, and favoured host classes. These features, together with rules for pronounciation, make a classification of phenomena a true language, that may be suitable for many uses.
    Date
    17. 2.2018 18:22:25
    Source
    Knowledge organization. 45(2018) no.1, S.43-53
  3. Gnoli, C.: Classification transcends library business : the case of BiblioPhil (2010) 0.04
    0.040847298 = product of:
      0.081694596 = sum of:
        0.01213797 = weight(_text_:information in 3698) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01213797 = score(doc=3698,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 3698, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3698)
        0.06955662 = sum of:
          0.035403505 = weight(_text_:organization in 3698) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.035403505 = score(doc=3698,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                0.050415643 = queryNorm
              0.19695997 = fieldWeight in 3698, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3698)
          0.03415312 = weight(_text_:22 in 3698) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03415312 = score(doc=3698,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.050415643 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3698, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3698)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Although bibliographic classifications usually adopt a perspective different from that of object classifications, the two have obvious relationships. These become especially relevant when users are looking for knowledge scattered in a wide variety of forms and media. This is an increasingly common situation, as library catalogues now coexist in the global digital environment with catalogues of archives, of museums, of commercial products, and many other information resources. In order to make the subject content of all these resources searchable, a broader conception of classification is needed, that can be applied to an knowledge item, rather than only bibliographic materials. To illustrate this we take an example of the research on bagpipes in Northern Italian folklore. For this kind of research, the most effective search strategy is a cross-media one, looking for many different knowledge sources such as published documents, police archives, painting details, museum specimens, organizations devoted to related subjects. To provide satisfying results for this kind of search, the traditional disciplinary approach to classification is not sufficient. Tools are needed in which knowledge items dealing with a phenomenon of interest can be retrieved independently from the other topics with which it is combined, the disciplinary context, and the medium where it occurs. This can be made possible if the basic units of classification are taken to be the phenomena treated, as recommended in the León Manifesto, rather than disciplines or other aspect features. The concept of bagpipes should be retrievable and browsable in any combination with other phenomena, disciplines, media etc. Examples are given of information sources that could be managed by this freely-faceted technique of classification.
    Date
    22. 7.2010 20:40:08
    Source
    Knowledge organization. 37(2010) no.3, S.223-229
  4. Gnoli, C.; Merli, G.; Pavan, G.; Bernuzzi, E.; Priano, M.: Freely faceted classification for a Web-based bibliographic archive : the BioAcoustic Reference Database (2010) 0.04
    0.03906973 = product of:
      0.07813946 = sum of:
        0.008582841 = weight(_text_:information in 3739) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008582841 = score(doc=3739,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 3739, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3739)
        0.06955662 = sum of:
          0.035403505 = weight(_text_:organization in 3739) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.035403505 = score(doc=3739,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                0.050415643 = queryNorm
              0.19695997 = fieldWeight in 3739, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3739)
          0.03415312 = weight(_text_:22 in 3739) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03415312 = score(doc=3739,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.050415643 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3739, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3739)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    The Integrative Level Classification (ILC) research project is experimenting with a knowledge organization system based on phenomena rather than disciplines. Each phenomenon has a constant notation, which can be combined with that of any other phenomenon in a freely faceted structure. Citation order can express differential focality of the facets. Very specific subjects can have long classmarks, although their complexity is reduced by various devices. Freely faceted classification is being tested by indexing a corpus of about 3300 papers in the interdisciplinary domain of bioacoustics. The subjects of these papers often include phenomena from a wide variety of integrative levels (mechanical waves, animals, behaviour, vessels, fishing, law, ...) as well as information about the methods of study, as predicted in the León Manifesto. The archive is recorded in a MySQL database, and can be fed and searched through PHP Web interfaces. Indexer's work is made easier by mechanisms that suggest possible classes on the basis of matching title words with terms in the ILC schedules, and synthesize automatically the verbal caption corresponding to the classmark being edited. Users can search the archive by selecting and combining values in each facet. Search refinement should be improved, especially for the cases where no record, or too many records, match the faceted query. However, experience is being gained progressively, showing that freely faceted classification by phenomena, theories, and methods is feasible and successfully working.
    Source
    Wissensspeicher in digitalen Räumen: Nachhaltigkeit - Verfügbarkeit - semantische Interoperabilität. Proceedings der 11. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation, Konstanz, 20. bis 22. Februar 2008. Hrsg.: J. Sieglerschmidt u. H.P.Ohly
  5. Gnoli, C.; Ledl, A.; Park, Z.; Trzmielewski, M.: Phenomenon-based vs. disciplinary classification : possibilities for evaluating and for mapping (2018) 0.03
    0.03139454 = product of:
      0.06278908 = sum of:
        0.013732546 = weight(_text_:information in 4804) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013732546 = score(doc=4804,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 4804, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4804)
        0.049056537 = product of:
          0.098113075 = sum of:
            0.098113075 = weight(_text_:organization in 4804) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.098113075 = score(doc=4804,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.5458315 = fieldWeight in 4804, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4804)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Series
    Advances in knowledge organization; vol.16
    Source
    Challenges and opportunities for knowledge organization in the digital age: proceedings of the Fifteenth International ISKO Conference, 9-11 July 2018, Porto, Portugal / organized by: International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), ISKO Spain and Portugal Chapter, University of Porto - Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Research Centre in Communication, Information and Digital Culture (CIC.digital) - Porto. Eds.: F. Ribeiro u. M.E. Cerveira
  6. Gnoli, C.: Naturalism vs pragmatism in knowledge organization (2004) 0.03
    0.028524885 = product of:
      0.05704977 = sum of:
        0.014565565 = weight(_text_:information in 2663) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014565565 = score(doc=2663,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 2663, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2663)
        0.042484205 = product of:
          0.08496841 = sum of:
            0.08496841 = weight(_text_:organization in 2663) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08496841 = score(doc=2663,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.47270393 = fieldWeight in 2663, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2663)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    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.
    Series
    Advances in knowledge organization; vol.9
    Source
    Knowledge organization and the global information society: Proceedings of the 8th International ISKO Conference 13-16 July 2004, London, UK. Ed.: I.C. McIlwaine
  7. Gnoli, C.: Classifying phenomena : Part 1: dimensions (2016) 0.02
    0.023770738 = product of:
      0.047541477 = sum of:
        0.01213797 = weight(_text_:information in 3417) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01213797 = score(doc=3417,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 3417, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3417)
        0.035403505 = product of:
          0.07080701 = sum of:
            0.07080701 = weight(_text_:organization in 3417) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07080701 = score(doc=3417,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.39391994 = fieldWeight in 3417, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3417)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    This is the first part of a study on the classification of phenomena. It starts by addressing the status of classification schemes among knowledge organization systems (KOSs), as some features of them have been overlooked in recent reviews of KOS types. It then considers the different dimensions implied in a KOS, which include: the observed phenomena, the cultural and disciplinary perspective under which they are treated, the features of documents carrying such treatment, the collections of such documents as managed in libraries, archives or museums, the information needs prompting to search and use these collections and the people experiencing such different information needs. Until now, most library classification schemes have given priority to the perspective dimension as they first list disciplines. However, an increasing number of voices are now considering the possibility of classification schemes giving priority to phenomena as advocated in the León Manifesto. Although these schemes first list phenomena as their main classes, they can as well express perspective or the other relevant dimensions that occur in a classified item. The independence of a phenomenon-based classification from the institutional divisions into disciplines contributes to giving knowledge organization a more proactive and influential role.
    Footnote
    Part 2 in: Knowledge organization. 44(2017) no.1, S.37-54.
    Source
    Knowledge organization. 43(2016) no.6, S.403-415
  8. Gnoli, C.: Ten long-term research questions in knowledge organization (2008) 0.02
    0.023545908 = product of:
      0.047091816 = sum of:
        0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 2134) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01029941 = score(doc=2134,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2134, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2134)
        0.036792405 = product of:
          0.07358481 = sum of:
            0.07358481 = weight(_text_:organization in 2134) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07358481 = score(doc=2134,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.40937364 = fieldWeight in 2134, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2134)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Research can benefit by periodical consideration of its status in a long-term perspective. In knowledge organization (KO), a number of basic questions remain to be addressed in the 21st century. Ten of them are identified and synthetically discussed: (1) Can KO principles be extended to a broader scope, including hypertexts, multimedia, museum objects, and monuments? (2) Can the two basic approaches, ontological and epistemological, be reconciled? (3) Can any ontological foundation of KO be identified? (4) Should disciplines continue to be the structural base of KO? (5) How can viewpoint warrant be respected? (6) How can KO be adapted to local collection needs? (7) How can KO deal with changes in knowledge? (8) How can KO systems represent all the dimensions listed above? (9) How can software and formats be improved to better serve these needs? (10) Who should do KO: information professionals, authors or readers?
    Source
    Knowledge organization. 35(2008) nos.2/3, S.137-149
  9. Gnoli, C.: Metadata about what? : distinguishing between ontic, epistemic, and documental dimensions in knowledge organization (2012) 0.02
    0.021399152 = product of:
      0.042798303 = sum of:
        0.01213797 = weight(_text_:information in 323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01213797 = score(doc=323,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 323, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=323)
        0.030660335 = product of:
          0.06132067 = sum of:
            0.06132067 = weight(_text_:organization in 323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06132067 = score(doc=323,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.34114468 = fieldWeight in 323, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=323)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    The spread of many new media and formats is changing the scenario faced by knowledge organizers: as printed monographs are not the only standard form of knowledge carrier anymore, the traditional kind of knowledge organization (KO) systems based on academic disciplines is put into question. A sounder foundation can be provided by an analysis of the different dimensions concurring to form the content of any knowledge item-what Brian Vickery described as the steps "from the world to the classifier." The ultimate referents of documents are the phenomena of the real world, that can be ordered by ontology, the study of what exists. Phenomena coexist in subjects with the perspectives by which they are considered, pertaining to epistemology, and with the formal features of knowledge carriers, adding a further, pragmatic layer. All these dimensions can be accounted for in metadata, but are often done so in mixed ways, making indexes less rigorous and interoperable. For example, while facet analysis was originally developed for subject indexing, many "faceted" interfaces today mix subject facets with form facets, and schemes presented as "ontologies" for the "semantic Web" also code for non-semantic information. In bibliographic classifications, phenomena are often confused with the disciplines dealing with them, the latter being assumed to be the most useful starting point, for users will have either one or another perspective. A general citation order of dimensions- phenomena, perspective, carrier-is recommended, helping to concentrate most relevant information at the beginning of headings.
    Source
    Knowledge organization. 39(2012) no.4, S.268-275
  10. Lardera, M.; Gnoli, C.; Rolandi, C.; Trzmielewski, M.: Developing SciGator, a DDC-based library browsing tool (2017) 0.02
    0.020866986 = product of:
      0.083467945 = sum of:
        0.083467945 = sum of:
          0.042484205 = weight(_text_:organization in 4144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.042484205 = score(doc=4144,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                0.050415643 = queryNorm
              0.23635197 = fieldWeight in 4144, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4144)
          0.04098374 = weight(_text_:22 in 4144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.04098374 = score(doc=4144,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.050415643 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4144, 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=4144)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Content
    Beitrag eines Special Issue: ISKO-Italy: 8' Incontro ISKO Italia, Università di Bologna, 22 maggio 2017, Bologna, Italia.
    Source
    Knowledge organization. 44(2017) no.8, S.638-643
  11. Gnoli, C.: ISKO News (2007) 0.02
    0.019621588 = product of:
      0.039243177 = sum of:
        0.008582841 = weight(_text_:information in 1092) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008582841 = score(doc=1092,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 1092, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1092)
        0.030660335 = product of:
          0.06132067 = sum of:
            0.06132067 = weight(_text_:organization in 1092) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06132067 = score(doc=1092,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.34114468 = fieldWeight in 1092, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1092)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Bericht über: Levels of Reality, Seminar, Bolzano (Bozen) Italy, 26-28 September 2007: Ontologies, the knowledge organization systems now widely used in knowledge management applications, take their name from a branch of philosophy. Philosophical ontology deals with the kinds and the properties of what exists, and with how they can be described by categories like entity, attribute, or process. Readers familiar with facet analysis will notice some analogy with the "fundamental categories" of faceted classifications, and this resemblance is not accidental. Indeed, knowledge organization systems use conceptual structures that can be variously reconnected with the categories of ontology. Though having more practical purposes, the ontologies and classifications of information science can benefit of those of philosophy.
    Source
    Knowledge organization. 34(2007) no.3, S.169-171
  12. Szostak, R.; Gnoli, C.; López-Huertas, M.: Interdisciplinary knowledge organization 0.02
    0.017119322 = product of:
      0.034238644 = sum of:
        0.009710376 = weight(_text_:information in 3804) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009710376 = score(doc=3804,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.10971737 = fieldWeight in 3804, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3804)
        0.024528269 = product of:
          0.049056537 = sum of:
            0.049056537 = weight(_text_:organization in 3804) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.049056537 = score(doc=3804,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.27291575 = fieldWeight in 3804, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3804)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    This book proposes a novel approach to classification, discusses its myriad advantages, and outlines how such an approach to classification can best be pursued. It encourages a collaborative effort toward the detailed development of such a classification. This book is motivated by the increased importance of interdisciplinary scholarship in the academy, and the widely perceived shortcomings of existing knowledge organization schemes in serving interdisciplinary scholarship. It is designed for scholars of classification research, knowledge organization, the digital environment, and interdisciplinarity itself. The approach recommended blends a general classification with domain-specific classification practices. The book reaches a set of very strong conclusions:
    LCSH
    Information technology / Management
    Subject
    Information technology / Management
  13. Gnoli, C.; Mei, H.: Freely faceted classification for Web-based information retrieval (2006) 0.02
    0.015770756 = product of:
      0.03154151 = sum of:
        0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 534) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01029941 = score(doc=534,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 534, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=534)
        0.021242103 = product of:
          0.042484205 = sum of:
            0.042484205 = weight(_text_:organization in 534) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.042484205 = score(doc=534,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.23635197 = fieldWeight in 534, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=534)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Content
    Beitrag eines Themenheftes "Knowledge organization systems and services"
  14. Gnoli, C.: Knowledge organization in Italy (2004) 0.01
    0.014979407 = product of:
      0.029958814 = sum of:
        0.00849658 = weight(_text_:information in 3750) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00849658 = score(doc=3750,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.0960027 = fieldWeight in 3750, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3750)
        0.021462236 = product of:
          0.04292447 = sum of:
            0.04292447 = weight(_text_:organization in 3750) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04292447 = score(doc=3750,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.23880129 = fieldWeight in 3750, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3750)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    As an Italian chapter of ISKO has recently been reorganized, I was kindly invited to Write a short report an current KO activities in our country. So, in the following, I will briefly illustrate the local situation of the various kinds of knowledge organization systems, as well as related developments and activities. I am grateful to Paola Capitani, Emanuela Casson, Michele Santoro, and Lorena Zuccolo for providing useful information to be included here.
    Content
    Terminology and thesauri BNCF is also involved in a working group collecting information an online terminological resources <http://wwwindire.it/websemantico>. The group is headed by Paola Capitani, and has organized several roundtables an terminology in special domains, such as economy, fashion, law, and education. Thesauri are generally poorly known and used in Italy, although there are significant exceptions: among faceted systems we can mention the "Thesauro italiano di sociologia," published in 1999, and the "Thesaurus regionale toscano," as well as specialized an social sciences including a general outline, available both in print (1996) and online <http:// www regione.toscana.it/ius/ns-thesaurus/>. Classification systems The Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) is by far the most widespread classification scheme in Italian libraries. A working group, coordinated by Luigi Crocetti, regularly translates the new editions of DDC manuals, and gives refresher courses an it for librarians. BNCF makes DDC numbers for bibliographical records both of its own catalogue, and of the national bibliography (= Bibliografia nazionale italiana: BNI), which is available for other libraries in a CD-ROM edition. A very large number of public libraries use DDC for their shelfmarks, so that users are accustomed to it. This situation is different from other European countries, e.g., Spain where UDC is widespread."
    Source
    Knowledge organization. 31(2004) no.1, S.64-66
  15. Gnoli, C.: Mentefacts as a missing level in theory of information science (2018) 0.01
    0.014757427 = product of:
      0.029514855 = sum of:
        0.015353453 = weight(_text_:information in 4624) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015353453 = score(doc=4624,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.1734784 = fieldWeight in 4624, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4624)
        0.014161401 = product of:
          0.028322803 = sum of:
            0.028322803 = weight(_text_:organization in 4624) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.028322803 = score(doc=4624,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.15756798 = fieldWeight in 4624, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4624)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose The current debate between two theoretical approaches in library and information science and knowledge organization (KO), the cognitive one and the sociological one, is addressed in view of their possible integration in a more general model. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach Personal knowledge of individual users, as focused in the cognitive approach, and social production and use of knowledge, as focused in the sociological approach, are reconnected to the theory of levels of reality, particularly in the versions of Nicolai Hartmann and Karl R. Popper (three worlds). The notions of artefact and mentefact, as proposed in anthropological literature and applied in some KO systems, are also examined as further contributions to the generalized framework. Some criticisms to these models are reviewed and discussed. Findings Both the cognitive approach and the sociological approach, if taken in isolation, prove to be cases of philosophical monism as they emphasize a single level over the others. On the other hand, each of them can be considered as a component of a pluralist ontology and epistemology, where individual minds and social communities are but two successive levels in knowledge production and use, and are followed by a further level of "objectivated spirit"; this can in turn be analyzed into artefacts and mentefacts. While all these levels are relevant to information science, mentefacts and their properties are its most peculiar objects of study, which make it distinct from such other disciplines as psychology and sociology. Originality/value This analysis shows how existing approaches can benefit from additional notions contributed by levels theory, to develop more complete and accurate models of information and knowledge phenomena.
    Content
    Vgl.: https://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/JD-04-2018-0054. Vgl. auch den Folgeartikel von B. Hjoerland: The foundation of information science: one world or three? A discussion of Gnoli (2018). In: Journal of documentation. 74(2019) no.1, S.164-171.
  16. Santis, R. de; Gnoli, C.: Expressing dependence relationships in the Integrative Levels Classification using OWL (2016) 0.01
    0.012264134 = product of:
      0.049056537 = sum of:
        0.049056537 = product of:
          0.098113075 = sum of:
            0.098113075 = weight(_text_:organization in 4931) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.098113075 = score(doc=4931,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.5458315 = fieldWeight in 4931, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4931)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Series
    Advances in knowledge organization; vol.15
    Source
    Knowledge organization for a sustainable world: challenges and perspectives for cultural, scientific, and technological sharing in a connected society : proceedings of the Fourteenth International ISKO Conference 27-29 September 2016, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil / organized by International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), ISKO-Brazil, São Paulo State University ; edited by José Augusto Chaves Guimarães, Suellen Oliveira Milani, Vera Dodebei
  17. Gnoli, C.: Workshop on Levels of reality as a KO paradigm : levels, types, facets: three structural principles for KO (2010) 0.01
    0.010621051 = product of:
      0.042484205 = sum of:
        0.042484205 = product of:
          0.08496841 = sum of:
            0.08496841 = weight(_text_:organization in 3524) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08496841 = score(doc=3524,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.47270393 = fieldWeight in 3524, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3524)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Three major principles in the structure of knowledge organization systems are identified and discussed: hierarchical trees of types, sets of facets conforming to general categories, and series of levels of reality. Each principle can be present at various degrees in different systems. The three principles can interact between them in various ways, depending on priority choices in system construction. Examples are reviewed of different priority options adopted in classifications and thesauri, both special and general, and their effects are critically examined. It is found that levels of reality, although less often explicitly acknowledged than other principles, contribute an important tool for knowledge organization.
    Series
    Advances in knowledge organization; vol.12
    Source
    Paradigms and conceptual systems in knowledge organization: Proceedings of the Eleventh International ISKO Conference, 23-26 February 2010 Rome, Italy. Edited by Claudio Gnoli and Fulvio Mazzocchi
  18. Gnoli, C.: Classifying phenomena : Part 2: Types and levels (2017) 0.01
    0.010621051 = product of:
      0.042484205 = sum of:
        0.042484205 = product of:
          0.08496841 = sum of:
            0.08496841 = weight(_text_:organization in 3177) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08496841 = score(doc=3177,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.47270393 = fieldWeight in 3177, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3177)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    After making the case that phenomena can be the primary unit of classification (Part 1), some basic principles to group and sort phenomena are considered. Entities can be grouped together on the basis of both their similarity (morphology) and their common origin (phylogeny). The resulting groups will form the classical hierarchical chains of types and subtypes. At every hierarchical degree, phenomena can form ordered sets (arrays), where their sorting can reflect levels of increasing organization, corresponding to an evolutionary order of appearance (emergence). The theory of levels of reality has been investigated by many philosophers and applied to knowledge organization systems by various authors, which are briefly reviewed. At the broadest degree, it allows to identify some major strata of phenomena (forms, matter, life, minds, societies and culture) in turn divided into layers. A list of twenty-six layers is proposed to form the main classes of the Integrative Levels Classification system. A combination of morphology and phylogeny can determine whether a given phenomenon should be a type of an existing level, or a level on its own.
    Footnote
    Part 1 in: Knowledge organization. 43(2016) no.6, S.403-415.
    Source
    Knowledge organization. 44(2017) no.1, S.37-54
  19. Gnoli, C.: Classifying phenomena : part 3: facets (2017) 0.01
    0.010621051 = product of:
      0.042484205 = sum of:
        0.042484205 = product of:
          0.08496841 = sum of:
            0.08496841 = weight(_text_:organization in 4158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08496841 = score(doc=4158,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.47270393 = fieldWeight in 4158, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4158)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Dimensions of knowledge: facets for knowledge organization. Eds.: R.P. Smiraglia, u. H.-L. Lee
  20. Gnoli, C.: Notation (2018) 0.01
    0.009198101 = product of:
      0.036792405 = sum of:
        0.036792405 = product of:
          0.07358481 = sum of:
            0.07358481 = weight(_text_:organization in 4650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07358481 = score(doc=4650,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050415643 = queryNorm
                0.40937364 = fieldWeight in 4650, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4650)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Notations are systems of symbols that can be combined according to syntactical rules to represent meanings in a specialized domain. In knowledge organization, they are systems of numerals, letters and punctuation marks associated to a concept that mechanically produce helpful sequences of them for arranging books on shelves, browsing subjects in directories and displaying items in catalogues. Most bibliographic classification systems, like Dewey Decimal Classification, use a positional notation allowing for expression of increasingly specific subjects by additional digits. However, some notations like that of Bliss Bibliographic Classification are purely ordinal and do not reflect the hierarchical degree of a subject. Notations can also be expressive of the syntactical structure of compound subjects (common auxiliaries, facets etc.) in various ways. In the digital media, notation can be recorded and managed in databases and exploited to provide appropriate search and display functionalities.
    Series
    Reviews of concepts in knowledge organization
    Source
    Knowledge organization. 45(2018) no.8, S.667-684