Search (14 results, page 1 of 1)

0.029778862 = product of:
  0.059557725 = sum of:
    0.059557725 = product of:
      0.11911545 = sum of:
        0.11911545 = weight(_text_:subject in 5612) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11911545 = score(doc=5612,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04550679 = queryNorm
            0.73184985 = fieldWeight in 5612, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5612)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Recent papers have called attention to discrepancies in the assignment of LCSH. While philosophical arguments can be made that subject analysis, if not a logical impossibility, at least is point-of-view dependent, subject headings continue to be assigned and continue to be useful. The hypothesis advanced in the present project is that to a considerable degree there is a clear-cut right and wrong to LCSH subject heading assignment. To test the hypothesis, it was postulated that the assignment of a subject heading is correct if it is supported by textual warrant (at least 20% of the book being cataloged is on the topic) and is constructed in accordance with the LoC Subject Cataloging Manual: Subject Headings. A sample of 100 books on scientific subjects was used to test the hypothesis

0.025726518 = product of:
  0.051453035 = sum of:
    0.051453035 = product of:
      0.10290607 = sum of:
        0.10290607 = weight(_text_:subject in 5278) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10290607 = score(doc=5278,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04550679 = queryNorm
            0.63225883 = fieldWeight in 5278, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5278)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.02227982 = product of:
  0.04455964 = sum of:
    0.04455964 = product of:
      0.08911928 = sum of:
        0.08911928 = weight(_text_:subject in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08911928 = score(doc=2654,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04550679 = queryNorm
            0.5475522 = fieldWeight in 2654, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2654)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This article discusses some of Ranganathan's contributions to the productive, practical and theoretical aspects of classification science. These include: (1) a set of design criteria to guide the designing of schemes for knowledge / subject classification; (2) a conceptual framework for organizing the universe of subjects; and (3) an understanding of the general principles underlying subject disciplines and classificatory languages. It concludes that Ranganathan has contributed significantly to laying the foundations for a science of subject classification.

0.02227982 = product of:
  0.04455964 = sum of:
    0.04455964 = product of:
      0.08911928 = sum of:
        0.08911928 = weight(_text_:subject in 8263) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08911928 = score(doc=8263,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04550679 = queryNorm
            0.5475522 = fieldWeight in 8263, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8263)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

An examination of some nonbook materials with respect to an aboutness model of indexing leads to the conclusion that there are instances that defy subject indexing. These occur not so much because of the nature of the medium per se but because it is being used for nondocumentary purposes, or, when being used for such purposes, the subject referenced is nonlexical

0.019494843 = product of:
  0.038989685 = sum of:
    0.038989685 = product of:
      0.07797937 = sum of:
        0.07797937 = weight(_text_:subject in 1066) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07797937 = score(doc=1066,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04550679 = queryNorm
            0.4791082 = fieldWeight in 1066, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1066)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Key problems of subject searches in online public access catalogs are that too much may be retrieved and that the display may be arranged in what appears to be an unintuitive and unhelpful manner. A study was undertaken on one large database to determine how often the display of a subject and its modifications and subdivisions extended over more than two screens and what the results on display would be of compressing geographic subdivisions and other modifications. The study then addressed the question of how often the display of a term and its subdivisions was interrupted by the appearance in the display of inverted headings, phrase headings, and headings with parenthetical qualifiers

0.019294888 = product of:
  0.038589776 = sum of:
    0.038589776 = product of:
      0.07717955 = sum of:
        0.07717955 = weight(_text_:subject in 27) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07717955 = score(doc=27,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04550679 = queryNorm
            0.4741941 = fieldWeight in 27, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=27)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Universal classification I: subject analysis and ordering systems. Proc. of the 4th Int. Study Conf. on Classification research, Augsburg, 28.6.-2.7.1982. Ed.: I. Dahlberg

0.018191395 = product of:
  0.03638279 = sum of:
    0.03638279 = product of:
      0.07276558 = sum of:
        0.07276558 = weight(_text_:subject in 5356) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07276558 = score(doc=5356,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04550679 = queryNorm
            0.4470745 = fieldWeight in 5356, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5356)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In an interview with Dorothy McGarry, Elaine Svenonius discusses her many-faceted career. Topics include her research interests in subject and descriptive cataloging (Svenonius notes that it "takes some untangling of vocabulary and semantics to see that the traditional bifurcation separating subject and descriptive cataloging is artificial"); her teaching experience, especially her use of Andrew Osborn's "active learning" seminar method; and her views about the development of information science and its relationship to librarianship.

0.013643546 = product of:
  0.027287092 = sum of:
    0.027287092 = product of:
      0.054574184 = sum of:
        0.054574184 = weight(_text_:subject in 1643) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054574184 = score(doc=1643,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04550679 = queryNorm
            0.33530587 = fieldWeight in 1643, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1643)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Die Diskussion um Vor- und Nachteile von Präkoordination oder Postkoordination wird unter den in der verbalen Sacherschließung Engagierten in Deutschland seit Jahren geführt. Mit zunehmender Verbreitung der RSWK gewinnen die Überlegungen, die sich angesichts der Ausbreitung des OPAC für das 'Zerschlagen' der Schlagwortketten aussprechen, an Bedeutung. In diesem Zusammenhang trägt eine Berücksichtigung der internationalen Debatte um Prä- und Postkoordination zur Erweiterung des nationalen Horizontes bei. Der Beitrag ist eine leicht gekürzte Übersetzung eines Referates, das die Autorin beim IFLA Satellite Meeting zum Thema 'Subject indexing in the 90's - principles and practices' im August 1993 in Lissabon gehalten hat

Footnote

Original in: Subject indexing: principles and practices in the 90's. Proceedings ... Ed.: R.P. Holley et al. München: Saur 1995, S.231-255. - Übersetzt und mit einem Nachwort (S.294-296) versehen von M. Heiner-Freiling

0.012863259 = product of:
  0.025726518 = sum of:
    0.025726518 = product of:
      0.051453035 = sum of:
        0.051453035 = weight(_text_:subject in 762) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.051453035 = score(doc=762,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04550679 = queryNorm
            0.31612942 = fieldWeight in 762, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=762)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Delineates on the changing role of vocabulary control devices such as classification, subject headings, and thesaurus. Identifies the basic issue in the design and development of these devices and their role in the changing information technology. The paper identifies the differentiations needed in the new roles of these devices in data base technology

0.012863259 = product of:
  0.025726518 = sum of:
    0.025726518 = product of:
      0.051453035 = sum of:
        0.051453035 = weight(_text_:subject in 3606) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.051453035 = score(doc=3606,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04550679 = queryNorm
            0.31612942 = fieldWeight in 3606, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3606)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Subject indexing: principles and practices in the 90's. Proceedings of the IFLA Satellite Meeting Held in Lisbon, Portugal, 17-18 August 1993, and sponsored by the IFLA Section on Classification and Indexing and the Instituto da Biblioteca Nacional e do Livro, Lisbon, Portugal. Ed.: R.P. Holley et al

0.011255352 = product of:
  0.022510704 = sum of:
    0.022510704 = product of:
      0.045021407 = sum of:
        0.045021407 = weight(_text_:subject in 2623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045021407 = score(doc=2623,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04550679 = queryNorm
            0.27661324 = fieldWeight in 2623, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2623)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Historical account of the sophisticated method of indexing developed by J.O. Kaiser (1896/97), a librarian at the Philadelphia Commercial Museum who established his index on cards (a novelty then) and distinguished his items according to the categories 'concrete', 'process', and 'country'. He also introduced "statement indexing" and rules to this end in order to permit the supply of "complete information" on a subject in a document. In summarizing these findings, the author stresses the necessitiy of establishing well-defined categories if an organization of terms is to serve e.g. information retrieval.

0.009647444 = product of:
  0.019294888 = sum of:
    0.019294888 = product of:
      0.038589776 = sum of:
        0.038589776 = weight(_text_:subject in 5599) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038589776 = score(doc=5599,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04550679 = queryNorm
            0.23709705 = fieldWeight in 5599, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5599)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

The LCSH century: one hundred years with the Library of Congress Subject Headings system. Ed.: A.T. Stone

0.009647444 = product of:
  0.019294888 = sum of:
    0.019294888 = product of:
      0.038589776 = sum of:
        0.038589776 = weight(_text_:subject in 5602) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038589776 = score(doc=5602,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04550679 = queryNorm
            0.23709705 = fieldWeight in 5602, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5602)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

The LCSH century: one hundred years with the Library of Congress Subject Headings system. Ed.: A.T. Stone

0.009095698 = product of:
  0.018191395 = sum of:
    0.018191395 = product of:
      0.03638279 = sum of:
        0.03638279 = weight(_text_:subject in 5056) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03638279 = score(doc=5056,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04550679 = queryNorm
            0.22353725 = fieldWeight in 5056, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5056)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: Knowledge organization 27(2000) no.3, S.173-175 (G. Campbell): "Bibliographic control rests on a rich and intriguing theoretical foundation. All too often, however, students and scholars of information studies pass this foundation over, perhaps because of its fragmentation. Information organization theory has evolved in tandem with practice, and particularly through innumerable policy decisions: its central tenets, therefore, appear in prefaces to manuals and catalogues, in library bulletins, in standards and rule interpretations, and in professional and scholarly conference proceedings. Gathering this theory together is a formidable task, and Svenonius has already made a significant contribution through the two sourcebooks she has coedited: Foundations of Cataloging (1985), and Theory of Subject Analysis (1985). With The Intellectual Foundation of Information Organization, 'Svenonius goes a huge step further: she pulls the fragments of bibliographic control theory together and sets them within a holistic theoretical framework. The result is a significant contribution to LIS scholarship, one which evokes the best of all possible responses: dissatisfied cries for more. Svenonius divides her treatise into two parts containing five chapters each. The first part provides a theoretically-grounded articulation of the objectives, entities, languages and principles of information organization. The field, she argues, rests on three distinct philsophical traditions. Systems philosophy, as developed in library circles by Charles Cutter, gives a holistic and visionary dimension to bibliographic control: a tendency to see individual processes as part of a larger, coherent structure. The philosophy of science, typified in the field by Cyril Cleverdon in the 1950s, emphasizes the need to quantify and generalize, and to subject the tenets of information retrieval to empirical verification. Language philosophy introduces the concept of language rules, and argues that information organization is a "particular kind of language use" (p. 6): an approach which enables us to employ linguistic concepts of semantics, vocabulary and syntax to explain the processes of information organization. Having established this framework, Svenonius goes on to discuss the objectives of bibliographic retrieval systems. Deftly combining the seminal contributions of Cutter, Seymour Lubetzky, the Paris Principles of 1961, and the IFLA objectives of 1997, she produces five central objectives of bibliographic control: locating entitles (finding), identifying entitles (collocating), selecting them (choice), acquiring or gaining access to them (acquisition), and navigating a bibliographic database (navigation) (p. 20)". -