-
Quinlan, E.; Rafferty, P.: Astronomy classification : towards a faceted classification scheme (2019)
0.06
0.056319296 = product of:
0.16895789 = sum of:
0.16895789 = weight(_text_:specialist in 5313) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.16895789 = score(doc=5313,freq=4.0), product of:
0.32440975 = queryWeight, product of:
6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.5208163 = fieldWeight in 5313, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5313)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Astronomy classification is often overlooked in classification discourse. Its rarity and obscurity, especially within UK librarianship, suggests it is an underdeveloped strand of classification research and is possibly undervalued in modern librarianship. The purpose of this research is to investigate the suitability and practicalities of the discipline of astronomy adopting a subject-specific faceted classification scheme and to provide a provi-sional outline of a special faceted astronomy classification scheme. The research demonstrates that the application of universal schemes for astronomy classification had left the interdisciplinary subject ill catered for and outdated, making accurate classification difficult for specialist astronomy collections. A faceted approach to classification development is supported by two qualitative literature-based research methods: historical research into astronomy classification and an analytico-synthetic classification case study. The subsequent classification development is influenced through a pragmatic and scholarly-scientific approach and constructed by means of instruction from faceted classification guides by Vickery (1960) and Batley (2005), and faceted classification principles from Ranaganathan (1937). This research fills a gap within classification discourse on specialist interdisciplinary subjects, specifically within astronomy and demonstrates the best means for their classification. It provides a means of assessing further the value of faceted classification within astronomy librarianship.
-
Thellefsen, M.; Thellefsen, T.: Pragmatic semiotics and knowledge organization (2004)
0.06
0.05575326 = product of:
0.16725978 = sum of:
0.16725978 = weight(_text_:specialist in 3535) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.16725978 = score(doc=3535,freq=2.0), product of:
0.32440975 = queryWeight, product of:
6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.51558185 = fieldWeight in 3535, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3535)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- The present paper presents a philosophical approach to knowledge organization, proposing the pragmatic doctrine of C.S. Peirce as basic analytical framework for knowledge domains. The theoretical framework discussed is related to the qualitative brauch of knowledge organization theory 1.e. within scope of Hjoerland's domain analytical view (Hjoerland and Albrechtsen 1995; Hjoerland 2002; Hjoerland 2004), and promote a general framework for analyzing domain knowledge and concepts. However, the concept of knowledge organization can be viewed in at least two perspectives, one that defines knowledge organization as an activity performed by a human actor e.g. an information specialist, and secondly a view that has the perspective of the inherent self-organizing structure of a knowledge domain the latter being investigated in the paper.
-
Minnigh, L.D.: Chaos in informatie, onderwerpsontsluiting en kennisoverdracht : de rol van de wetenschappelijke bibliotheek (1993)
0.01
0.014384385 = product of:
0.043153156 = sum of:
0.043153156 = product of:
0.08630631 = sum of:
0.08630631 = weight(_text_:librarians in 6606) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08630631 = score(doc=6606,freq=2.0), product of:
0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.39593065 = fieldWeight in 6606, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6606)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Existing classification systems require constant expansion to accomodate new subject fields, while subject indexing techniques fail to display the relationship of subjects. Relational databases are currently being developed which will guide users through the differing levels of subjects, using the 'cartography of science'. Such developments will enable librarians to play a more interactive role in information retrieval and will have far-reaching consequences on the design of subject-indexing systems
-
Garcia Marco, F.J.; Esteban Navarro, M.A.: On some contributions of the cognitive sciences and epistemology to a theory of classification (1995)
0.01
0.014384385 = product of:
0.043153156 = sum of:
0.043153156 = product of:
0.08630631 = sum of:
0.08630631 = weight(_text_:librarians in 5559) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08630631 = score(doc=5559,freq=2.0), product of:
0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.39593065 = fieldWeight in 5559, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5559)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Discusses classification as a central resource of human informational activity and as a central aspect of research for many sciences. Argues that thinking about the background of classification can help improve, or at least clarify, the practical tasks of documentary workers and librarians. Discusses the relationship and gaps between cognitive science and information science, and considers the contributions of epistemology and cognitive psychology; in particular, focuses on the role of the latter in the development of an integrative theory of classification
-
Maniez, J.: ¬Des classifications aux thesaurus : du bon usage des facettes (1999)
0.01
0.013186343 = product of:
0.03955903 = sum of:
0.03955903 = product of:
0.07911806 = sum of:
0.07911806 = weight(_text_:22 in 6404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07911806 = score(doc=6404,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6404, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6404)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 1. 8.1996 22:01:00
-
Maniez, J.: ¬Du bon usage des facettes : des classifications aux thésaurus (1999)
0.01
0.013186343 = product of:
0.03955903 = sum of:
0.03955903 = product of:
0.07911806 = sum of:
0.07911806 = weight(_text_:22 in 3773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07911806 = score(doc=3773,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3773, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3773)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 1. 8.1996 22:01:00
-
Foskett, D.J.: Systems theory and its relevance to documentary classification (2017)
0.01
0.013186343 = product of:
0.03955903 = sum of:
0.03955903 = product of:
0.07911806 = sum of:
0.07911806 = weight(_text_:22 in 3176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07911806 = score(doc=3176,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3176, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3176)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 6. 5.2017 18:46:22
-
Bosch, M.: Ontologies, different reasoning strategies, different logics, different kinds of knowledge representation : working together (2006)
0.01
0.012586337 = product of:
0.03775901 = sum of:
0.03775901 = product of:
0.07551802 = sum of:
0.07551802 = weight(_text_:librarians in 166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07551802 = score(doc=166,freq=2.0), product of:
0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.3464393 = fieldWeight in 166, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=166)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- The recent experiences in the building, maintenance and reuse of ontologies has shown that the most efficient approach is the collaborative one. However, communication between collaborators such as IT professionals, librarians, web designers and subject matter experts is difficult and time consuming. This is because there are different reasoning strategies, different logics and different kinds of knowledge representation in the applications of Semantic Web. This article intends to be a reference scheme. It uses concise and simple explanations that can be used in common by specialists of different backgrounds working together in an application of Semantic Web.
-
Szostak, R.: ¬A pluralistic approach to the philosophy of classification : a case for "public knowledge" (2015)
0.01
0.012586337 = product of:
0.03775901 = sum of:
0.03775901 = product of:
0.07551802 = sum of:
0.07551802 = weight(_text_:librarians in 5541) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07551802 = score(doc=5541,freq=2.0), product of:
0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.3464393 = fieldWeight in 5541, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5541)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Any classification system should be evaluated with respect to a variety of philosophical and practical concerns. This paper explores several distinct issues: the nature of a work, the value of a statement, the contribution of information science to philosophy, the nature of hierarchy, ethical evaluation, pre- versus postcoordination, the lived experience of librarians, and formalization versus natural language. It evaluates a particular approach to classification in terms of each of these but draws general lessons for philosophical evaluation. That approach to classification emphasizes the free combination of basic concepts representing both real things in the world and the relationships among these; works are also classified in terms of theories, methods, and perspectives applied.
-
Hjoerland, B.; Nicolaisen, J.: Scientific and scholarly classifications are not "naïve" : a comment to Begthol (2003) (2004)
0.01
0.008990241 = product of:
0.026970722 = sum of:
0.026970722 = product of:
0.053941444 = sum of:
0.053941444 = weight(_text_:librarians in 3023) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.053941444 = score(doc=3023,freq=2.0), product of:
0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.24745665 = fieldWeight in 3023, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3023)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Relationships between Knowledge Organization in LIS and Scientific & Scholarly Classifications In her paper "Classification for Information Retrieval and Classification for Knowledge Discovery: Relationships between 'Professional' and 'Naive' Classifications" (KO v30, no.2, 2003), Beghtol outlines how Scholarly activities and research lead to classification systems which subsequently are disseminated in publications which are classified in information retrieval systems, retrieved by the users and again used in Scholarly activities and so on. We think this model is correct and that its point is important. What we are reacting to is the fact that Beghtol describes the Classifications developed by scholars as "naive" while she describes the Classifications developed by librarians and information scientists as "professional." We fear that this unfortunate terminology is rooted in deeply ar chored misjudgments about the relationships between scientific and Scholarly classification an the one side and LIS Classifications an the other. Only a correction of this misjudgment may give us in the field of knowledge organization a Chance to do a job that is not totally disrespected and disregarded by the rest of the intellectual world.
-
Connaway, L.S.; Sievert, M.C.: Comparison of three classification systems for information on health insurance (1996)
0.01
0.008790895 = product of:
0.026372686 = sum of:
0.026372686 = product of:
0.052745372 = sum of:
0.052745372 = weight(_text_:22 in 7242) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.052745372 = score(doc=7242,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 7242, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7242)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 22. 4.1997 21:10:19
-
Belayche, C.: ¬A propos de la classification de Dewey (1997)
0.01
0.008790895 = product of:
0.026372686 = sum of:
0.026372686 = product of:
0.052745372 = sum of:
0.052745372 = weight(_text_:22 in 1171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.052745372 = score(doc=1171,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1171, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1171)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Source
- Bulletin d'informations de l'Association des Bibliothecaires Francais. 1997, no.175, S.22-23
-
Lin, W.-Y.C.: ¬The concept and applications of faceted classifications (2006)
0.01
0.008790895 = product of:
0.026372686 = sum of:
0.026372686 = product of:
0.052745372 = sum of:
0.052745372 = weight(_text_:22 in 5083) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.052745372 = score(doc=5083,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5083, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5083)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 27. 5.2007 22:19:35
-
Lorenz, B.: Zur Theorie und Terminologie der bibliothekarischen Klassifikation (2018)
0.01
0.008790895 = product of:
0.026372686 = sum of:
0.026372686 = product of:
0.052745372 = sum of:
0.052745372 = weight(_text_:22 in 4339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.052745372 = score(doc=4339,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4339, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4339)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Pages
- S.1-22
-
Winske, E.: ¬The development and structure of an urban, regional, and local documents classification scheme (1996)
0.01
0.0076920334 = product of:
0.0230761 = sum of:
0.0230761 = product of:
0.0461522 = sum of:
0.0461522 = weight(_text_:22 in 7241) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0461522 = score(doc=7241,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 7241, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7241)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Footnote
- Paper presented at conference on 'Local documents, a new classification scheme' at the Research Caucus of the Florida Library Association Annual Conference, Fort Lauderdale, Florida 22 Apr 95
-
Olson, H.A.: Sameness and difference : a cultural foundation of classification (2001)
0.01
0.0076920334 = product of:
0.0230761 = sum of:
0.0230761 = product of:
0.0461522 = sum of:
0.0461522 = weight(_text_:22 in 166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0461522 = score(doc=166,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 166, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=166)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
-
Hjoerland, B.: Theories of knowledge organization - theories of knowledge (2017)
0.01
0.0076920334 = product of:
0.0230761 = sum of:
0.0230761 = product of:
0.0461522 = sum of:
0.0461522 = weight(_text_:22 in 3494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0461522 = score(doc=3494,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3494, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3494)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Pages
- S.22-36
-
Hjoerland, B.: ¬The methodology of constructing classification schemes : a discussion of the state-of-the-art (2003)
0.01
0.0071921926 = product of:
0.021576578 = sum of:
0.021576578 = product of:
0.043153156 = sum of:
0.043153156 = weight(_text_:librarians in 2760) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043153156 = score(doc=2760,freq=2.0), product of:
0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.19796532 = fieldWeight in 2760, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2760)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Special classifications have been somewhat neglected in KO compared to general classifications. The methodology of constructing special classifications is important, however, also for the methodology of constructing general classification schemes. The methodology of constructing special classifications can be regarded as one among about a dozen approaches to domain analysis. The methodology of (special) classification in LIS has been dominated by the rationalistic facet-analytic tradition, which, however, neglects the question of the empirical basis of classification. The empirical basis is much better grasped by, for example, bibliometric methods. Even the combination of rational and empirical methods is insufficient. This presentation will provide evidence for the necessity of historical and pragmatic methods for the methodology of classification and will point to the necessity of analyzing "paradigms". The presentation covers the methods of constructing classifications from Ranganathan to the design of ontologies in computer science and further to the recent "paradigm shift" in classification research. 1. Introduction Classification of a subject field is one among about eleven approaches to analyzing a domain that are specific for information science and in my opinion define the special competencies of information specialists (Hjoerland, 2002a). Classification and knowledge organization are commonly regarded as core qualifications of librarians and information specialists. Seen from this perspective one expects a firm methodological basis for the field. This paper tries to explore the state-of-the-art conceming the methodology of classification. 2. Classification: Science or non-science? As it is part of the curriculum at universities and subject in scientific journals and conferences like ISKO, orte expects classification/knowledge organization to be a scientific or scholarly activity and a scientific field. However, very often when information specialists classify or index documents and when they revise classification system, the methods seem to be rather ad hoc. Research libraries or scientific databases may employ people with adequate subject knowledge. When information scientists construct or evaluate systems, they very often elicit the knowledge from "experts" (Hjorland, 2002b, p. 260). Mostly no specific arguments are provided for the specific decisions in these processes.
-
Kwasnik, B.H.: ¬The role of classification in knowledge representation (1999)
0.01
0.0065931715 = product of:
0.019779515 = sum of:
0.019779515 = product of:
0.03955903 = sum of:
0.03955903 = weight(_text_:22 in 2464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03955903 = score(doc=2464,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2464, 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=2464)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Source
- Library trends. 48(1999) no.1, S.22-47
-
Slavic, A.: On the nature and typology of documentary classifications and their use in a networked environment (2007)
0.01
0.0065931715 = product of:
0.019779515 = sum of:
0.019779515 = product of:
0.03955903 = sum of:
0.03955903 = weight(_text_:22 in 780) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03955903 = score(doc=780,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04866305 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 780, 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=780)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 22.12.2007 17:22:31
