Search (290 results, page 1 of 15)

0.059679553 = product of:
  0.08951933 = sum of:
    0.077532046 = weight(_text_:development in 210) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.077532046 = score(doc=210,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.16011542 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04384008 = queryNorm
        0.484226 = fieldWeight in 210, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=210)
    0.011987286 = product of:
      0.035961855 = sum of:
        0.035961855 = weight(_text_:29 in 210) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035961855 = score(doc=210,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1542157 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04384008 = queryNorm
            0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 210, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=210)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Game development artifacts resulting from the creation process of video games, such as design documents, style guides, test builds, and marketing materials, provide rich contextual information about how and why the game was created. Better organizing and preserving these materials will not only enrich our understanding of the history of these media but also educate and inspire the next generation of video game creators. This research aims to improve our theoretical understanding of how to organize and represent game development artifacts by examining the various types of artifacts created and their attendant issues and challenges. We adopted a multimethod approach employing an examination of existing collections and 29 interviews with creators, information professionals, and game researchers. From these data, we analyze the current practices, expressed values, and perceived challenges of these stakeholders, produce a taxonomy of game development artifacts, and provide best practices recommendations for describing them.

0.045342755 = product of:
  0.06801413 = sum of:
    0.058024727 = product of:
      0.17407417 = sum of:
        0.17407417 = weight(_text_:3a in 5669) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.17407417 = score(doc=5669,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.37167668 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04384008 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 5669, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5669)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.009989405 = product of:
      0.029968213 = sum of:
        0.029968213 = weight(_text_:29 in 5669) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029968213 = score(doc=5669,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1542157 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04384008 = queryNorm
            0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 5669, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5669)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Content

"Die Englischsprachige Wikipedia verfügt jetzt über mehr als 6 Millionen Artikel. An zweiter Stelle kommt die deutschsprachige Wikipedia mit 2.3 Millionen Artikeln, an dritter Stelle steht die französischsprachige Wikipedia mit 2.1 Millionen Artikeln (via Researchbuzz: Firehose <https://rbfirehose.com/2020/01/24/techcrunch-wikipedia-now-has-more-than-6-million-articles-in-english/> und Techcrunch <https://techcrunch.com/2020/01/23/wikipedia-english-six-million-articles/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Techcrunch+%28TechCrunch%29&guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly9yYmZpcmVob3NlLmNvbS8yMDIwLzAxLzI0L3RlY2hjcnVuY2gtd2lraXBlZGlhLW5vdy1oYXMtbW9yZS10aGFuLTYtbWlsbGlvbi1hcnRpY2xlcy1pbi1lbmdsaXNoLw&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAK0zHfjdDZ_spFZBF_z-zDjtL5iWvuKDumFTzm4HvQzkUfE2pLXQzGS6FGB_y-VISdMEsUSvkNsg2U_NWQ4lwWSvOo3jvXo1I3GtgHpP8exukVxYAnn5mJspqX50VHIWFADHhs5AerkRn3hMRtf_R3F1qmEbo8EROZXp328HMC-o>). 250120 via digithek ch = #fineBlog s.a.: Angesichts der Veröffentlichung des 6-millionsten Artikels vergangene Woche in der englischsprachigen Wikipedia hat die Community-Zeitungsseite "Wikipedia Signpost" ein Moratorium bei der Veröffentlichung von Unternehmensartikeln gefordert. Das sei kein Vorwurf gegen die Wikimedia Foundation, aber die derzeitigen Maßnahmen, um die Enzyklopädie gegen missbräuchliches undeklariertes Paid Editing zu schützen, funktionierten ganz klar nicht. *"Da die ehrenamtlichen Autoren derzeit von Werbung in Gestalt von Wikipedia-Artikeln überwältigt werden, und da die WMF nicht in der Lage zu sein scheint, dem irgendetwas entgegenzusetzen, wäre der einzige gangbare Weg für die Autoren, fürs erste die Neuanlage von Artikeln über Unternehmen zu untersagen"*, schreibt der Benutzer Smallbones in seinem Editorial <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2020-01-27/From_the_editor> zur heutigen Ausgabe."

0.044468593 = product of:
  0.06670289 = sum of:
    0.054823436 = weight(_text_:development in 1181) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.054823436 = score(doc=1181,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.16011542 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04384008 = queryNorm
        0.34239948 = fieldWeight in 1181, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1181)
    0.011879452 = product of:
      0.035638355 = sum of:
        0.035638355 = weight(_text_:22 in 1181) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035638355 = score(doc=1181,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1535205 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04384008 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1181, 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=1181)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The Nuovo soggettario, the official Italian subject indexing system edited by the National Central Library of Florence, is made up of interactive components, the core of which is a general thesaurus and some rules of a conventional syntax for subject string construction. The Nuovo soggettario Thesaurus is in compliance with ISO 25964: 2011-2013, IFLA LRM, and FAIR principle (findability, accessibility, interoperability, and reusability). Its open data are available in the Zthes, MARC21, and in SKOS formats and allow for interoperability with l library, archive, and museum databases. The Thesaurus's macrostructure is organized into four fundamental macro-categories, thirteen categories, and facets. The facets allow for the orderly development of hierarchies, thereby limiting polyhierarchies and promoting the grouping of homogenous concepts. This paper addresses the main features and peculiarities which have characterized the consistent development of this categorical structure and its effects on the syntactic sphere in a predominantly pre-coordinated usage context.

Date

26.11.2023 18:59:22

0.043962225 = product of:
  0.06594334 = sum of:
    0.055953935 = weight(_text_:development in 5967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.055953935 = score(doc=5967,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.16011542 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04384008 = queryNorm
        0.34946 = fieldWeight in 5967, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5967)
    0.009989405 = product of:
      0.029968213 = sum of:
        0.029968213 = weight(_text_:29 in 5967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029968213 = score(doc=5967,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1542157 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04384008 = queryNorm
            0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 5967, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5967)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Libraries play a central role for youth and digital learning. As libraries transition to learning spaces, youth librarians can engage in aspects of democratic design that empowers youth. Participatory design (PD) is a user-centered design method that can support librarians in the democratic development of digital learning spaces. However, while PD has been used in libraries, we have little knowledge of how youth librarians can act as codesign partners. We need a conceptual model to understand the role of youth librarians in codesign, and how their experiences are integrated into youth design partnerships. To generate this model, we examine a case study of the evolutionary process of a single librarian and the development of a library system's learning activities through PD. Using the idea of equal design partnerships, we analyzed video recordings and stakeholder interviews on how children (ages 7-11) worked together with a librarian to develop new digital learning activities. Our discussion focuses on the development of a participatory librarian design conceptual model that situates librarians as design partners with youth. The article concludes with recommendations for integrating PD methods into libraries to create digital learning spaces and suggestions for moving forward with this design perspective.

Date

12. 9.2020 19:29:20

0.03939093 = product of:
  0.05908639 = sum of:
    0.04522703 = weight(_text_:development in 40) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04522703 = score(doc=40,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16011542 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04384008 = queryNorm
        0.28246516 = fieldWeight in 40, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=40)
    0.0138593605 = product of:
      0.04157808 = sum of:
        0.04157808 = weight(_text_:22 in 40) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04157808 = score(doc=40,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1535205 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04384008 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 40, 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=40)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Conclusion There is a reason why Google Scholar and Web of Science/Scopus are kings of the hills in their various arenas. They have strong brand recogniton, a head start in development and a mass of eyeballs and users that leads to an almost virtious cycle of improvement. Competing against such well established competitors is not easy even when one has deep pockets (Microsoft) or a killer idea (scite). It will be interesting to see how the landscape will look like in 2030. Stay tuned for part II where I review each particular index.

Date

17.11.2020 12:22:59

0.03711707 = product of:
  0.055675603 = sum of:
    0.045686197 = weight(_text_:development in 1086) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045686197 = score(doc=1086,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.16011542 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04384008 = queryNorm
        0.2853329 = fieldWeight in 1086, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1086)
    0.009989405 = product of:
      0.029968213 = sum of:
        0.029968213 = weight(_text_:29 in 1086) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029968213 = score(doc=1086,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1542157 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04384008 = queryNorm
            0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 1086, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1086)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Knowledge management (KM) is increasingly important to the field of information and communication technologies for development (ICT4D). Yet, scant literature has addressed KM in the ICT4D context. This study takes an important step toward addressing this gap by conceptualizing KM in the context of ICT4D based on the people-process-technology perspective. To elicit KM factors most relevant to ICT4D, a Delphi study is conducted with a panel of experts representing three key stakeholder groups (beneficiaries, partners, and designers) with cumulative experience of leading ICT4D projects in 25 countries. Based on the Delphi study findings, 16 factors relevant to KM in ICT4D are synthesized. A multi-stakeholder engagement framework for KM in ICT4D and an activity checklist are proposed. The study contributes to the body of knowledge by providing insights into the differing views of stakeholders related to KM practices in ICT4D projects. Practitioners may find the framework and checklist useful in coordinating and managing KM in ICT4D projects. As development initiatives become increasingly knowledge focused, the study calls upon researchers for more enquiry in this progressive area of study.

Date

16.11.2023 18:55:29

0.03705716 = product of:
  0.055585742 = sum of:
    0.045686197 = weight(_text_:development in 998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045686197 = score(doc=998,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.16011542 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04384008 = queryNorm
        0.2853329 = fieldWeight in 998, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=998)
    0.009899544 = product of:
      0.029698629 = sum of:
        0.029698629 = weight(_text_:22 in 998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029698629 = score(doc=998,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1535205 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04384008 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 998, 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=998)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The paper reports a longitudinal analysis of the topical and methodological development of Library and Information Science (LIS). Its focus is on the effects of researchers' disciplines on these developments. The study extends an earlier cross-sectional study (Vakkari et al., Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2022a, 73, 1706-1722) by a coordinated dataset representing a content analysis of articles published in 31 scholarly LIS journals in 1995, 2005, and 2015. It is novel in its coverage of authors' disciplines, topical and methodological aspects in a coordinated dataset spanning two decades thus allowing trend analysis. The findings include a shrinking trend in the share of LIS from 67 to 36% while Computer Science, and Business and Economics increase their share from 9 and 6% to 21 and 16%, respectively. The earlier cross-sectional study (Vakkari et al., Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2022a, 73, 1706-1722) for the year 2015 identified three topical clusters of LIS research, focusing on topical subfields, methodologies, and contributing disciplines. Correspondence analysis confirms their existence already in 1995 and traces their development through the decades. The contributing disciplines infuse their concepts, research questions, and approaches to LIS and may also subsume vital parts of LIS in their own structures of knowledge production.

Date

22. 6.2023 18:15:06

0.03383554 = product of:
  0.05075331 = sum of:
    0.038766023 = weight(_text_:development in 736) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.038766023 = score(doc=736,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16011542 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04384008 = queryNorm
        0.242113 = fieldWeight in 736, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=736)
    0.011987286 = product of:
      0.035961855 = sum of:
        0.035961855 = weight(_text_:29 in 736) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035961855 = score(doc=736,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1542157 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04384008 = queryNorm
            0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 736, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=736)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The representation of information in subject cataloging as a result of subject analysis will depend on the cataloger's prior knowledge, influenced by subjectivity. The subject analysis in cataloging is a central theme of this investigation with the aim to elaborate guidelines for subject analysis in cataloging. For this purpose, how books are cataloged in university libraries has been verified. The Individual Verbal Protocol was applied with catalogers from Brazilian and Spanish University Libraries. Directions for the elements and variables of the subject analysis and procedures for good development were obtained to constitute the Guidelines of Subject Analysis in Cataloging. It is concluded that the guidelines formed by four sections are indicated for incorporation in subject cataloging procedure manuals for the purpose of improving the levels of representation and information retrieval results.

Date

29. 9.2022 18:14:27

0.02964573 = product of:
  0.044468593 = sum of:
    0.036548957 = weight(_text_:development in 181) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.036548957 = score(doc=181,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.16011542 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04384008 = queryNorm
        0.22826631 = fieldWeight in 181, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=181)
    0.007919635 = product of:
      0.023758903 = sum of:
        0.023758903 = weight(_text_:22 in 181) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023758903 = score(doc=181,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1535205 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04384008 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 181, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=181)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to explore the information needs and information-seeking behaviours of the new generation of engineering designers. A survey study is used to approach what their information needs are, how these needs change during an engineering design project and how their information-seeking behaviours have been influenced by the newly developed information technologies (ITs). Through an in-depth analysis of the survey results, the key functions have been identified for the next-generation management systems. Design/methodology/approach The paper first proposed four hypotheses on the information needs and information-seeking behaviours of young engineers. Then, a survey study was undertaken to understand their information usage in terms of the information needs and information-seeking behaviours during a complete engineering design process. Through analysing the survey results, several findings were obtained and on this basis, further comparisons were made to discuss and evaluate the hypotheses. Findings The paper has revealed that the engineering designers' information needs will evolve throughout the engineering design project; thus, they should be assisted at several different levels. Although they intend to search information and knowledge on know-what and know-how, what they really require is the know-why knowledge in order to help them complete design tasks. Also, the paper has shown how the newly developed ITs and web-based applications have influenced the engineers' information-seeking practices. Research limitations/implications The research subjects chosen in this study are engineering students in universities who, although not as experienced as engineers in companies, do go through a complete design process with the tasks similar to industrial scenarios. In addition, the focus of this study is to understand the information-seeking behaviours of a new generation of design engineers, so that the development of next-generation information and knowledge management systems can be well informed. In this sense, the results obtained do reveal some new knowledge about the information-seeking behaviours during a general design process. Practical implications This paper first identifies the information needs and information-seeking behaviours of the new generation of engineering designers. On this basis, the varied ways to meet these needs and behaviours are discussed and elaborated. This intends to provide the key characteristics for the development of the next-generation knowledge management system for engineering design projects. Originality/value This paper proposes a novel means of exploring the future engineers' information needs and information-seeking behaviours in a collaborative working environment. It also characterises the key features and functions for the next generation of knowledge management systems for engineering design.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

0.028196286 = product of:
  0.042294428 = sum of:
    0.03230502 = weight(_text_:development in 5755) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03230502 = score(doc=5755,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16011542 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04384008 = queryNorm
        0.20176083 = fieldWeight in 5755, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5755)
    0.009989405 = product of:
      0.029968213 = sum of:
        0.029968213 = weight(_text_:29 in 5755) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029968213 = score(doc=5755,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1542157 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04384008 = queryNorm
            0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 5755, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5755)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

This paper discusses the Hornbostel-Sachs Classification of Musical Instruments. This classification system was originally designed for musical instruments and books about instruments, and was first published in German in 1914. Hornbostel-Sachs has dominated organological discourse and practice since its creation, and this article analyses the scheme's context, background, versions and impact. The position of Hornbostel-Sachs in the history and development of instrument classification is explored. This is followed by a detailed analysis of the mechanics of the scheme, including its decimal notation, the influential broad categories of the scheme, its warrant and its typographical layout. The version history of the scheme is outlined and the relationships between versions is visualised, including its translations, the introduction of the electrophones category and the Musical Instruments Museums Online (MIMO) version designed for a digital environment. The reception of Hornbostel-Sachs is analysed, and its usage, criticism and impact are all considered. As well as dominating organological research and practice for over a century, it is shown that Hornbostel-Sachs also had a significant influence on the bibliographic classification of music.

Footnote

Derived from the article of similar title in the ISKO Encyclopedia of Knowledge Organization Version 1.1 (= 1.0 plus details on electrophones and Wikipedia); version 1.0 published 2019-01-17, this version 2019-05-29. Article category: KOS, specific (domain specific). The author would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their useful comments, as well as the editor, Professor Birger Hjørland, for all of his insightful comments and ideas.

0.028196286 = product of:
  0.042294428 = sum of:
    0.03230502 = weight(_text_:development in 443) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03230502 = score(doc=443,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16011542 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04384008 = queryNorm
        0.20176083 = fieldWeight in 443, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=443)
    0.009989405 = product of:
      0.029968213 = sum of:
        0.029968213 = weight(_text_:29 in 443) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029968213 = score(doc=443,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1542157 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04384008 = queryNorm
            0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 443, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=443)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

There is no information search system can assist young children's known picture book search needs since the information is not organized according to their cognitive abilities and needs. Therefore, this study explored young children's known picture book search strategies and extracted picture book search elements by simulating a search scenario and playing a picture book search game. The study found 29 elements children used to search for known picture books. Then, these elements are classified into three dimensions: The first dimension is the concept category of an element. The second dimension is an element's status in the story. The third dimension indicates where an element appears in a picture book. Additionally, it revealed a young children's general search strategy: Children first use auditory elements that they hear from the adults during reading. After receiving error returns, they add visual elements that they see by themselves in picture books. The findings can not only help to understand young children's known-item search and reformulation strategies during searching but also provide theoretical support for the development of a picture book information organization schema in the search system.

0.028136378 = product of:
  0.042204566 = sum of:
    0.03230502 = weight(_text_:development in 5617) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03230502 = score(doc=5617,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16011542 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04384008 = queryNorm
        0.20176083 = fieldWeight in 5617, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5617)
    0.009899544 = product of:
      0.029698629 = sum of:
        0.029698629 = weight(_text_:22 in 5617) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029698629 = score(doc=5617,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1535205 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04384008 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5617, 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=5617)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

In a digital library, book search is one of the most important information services. However, with the rapid development of network technologies such as cloud computing, the server-side of a digital library is becoming more and more untrusted; thus, how to prevent the disclosure of users' book query privacy is causing people's increasingly extensive concern. In this article, we propose to construct a group of plausible fake queries for each user book query to cover up the sensitive subjects behind users' queries. First, we propose a basic framework for the privacy protection in book search, which requires no change to the book search algorithm running on the server-side, and no compromise to the accuracy of book search. Second, we present a privacy protection model for book search to formulate the constraints that ideal fake queries should satisfy, that is, (i) the feature similarity, which measures the confusion effect of fake queries on users' queries, and (ii) the privacy exposure, which measures the cover-up effect of fake queries on users' sensitive subjects. Third, we discuss the algorithm implementation for the privacy model. Finally, the effectiveness of our approach is demonstrated by theoretical analysis and experimental evaluation.

Date

6. 1.2020 17:22:25

0.028136378 = product of:
  0.042204566 = sum of:
    0.03230502 = weight(_text_:development in 5844) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03230502 = score(doc=5844,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16011542 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04384008 = queryNorm
        0.20176083 = fieldWeight in 5844, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5844)
    0.009899544 = product of:
      0.029698629 = sum of:
        0.029698629 = weight(_text_:22 in 5844) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029698629 = score(doc=5844,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1535205 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04384008 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5844, 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=5844)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Purpose This paper investigates how school teachers look for informational texts for their classrooms. Access to current, varied and authentic informational texts improves learning outcomes for K-12 students, but many teachers lack resources to expand and update readings. The Web offers freely available resources, but finding suitable ones is time-consuming. This research lays the groundwork for building tools to ease that burden. Design/methodology/approach This paper reports qualitative findings from a study in two stages: (1) a set of semistructured interviews, based on the critical incident technique, eliciting teachers' information-seeking practices and challenges; and (2) observations of teachers using a prototype teaching-oriented news search tool under a think-aloud protocol. Findings Teachers articulated different objectives and ways of using readings in their classrooms, goals and self-reported practices varied by experience level. Teachers struggled to formulate queries that are likely to return readings on specific course topics, instead searching directly for abstract topics. Experience differences did not translate into observable differences in search skill or success in the lab study. Originality/value There is limited work on teachers' information-seeking practices, particularly on how teachers look for texts for classroom use. This paper describes how teachers look for information in this context, setting the stage for future development and research on how to support this use case. Understanding and supporting teachers looking for information is a rich area for future research, due to the complexity of the information need and the fact that teachers are not looking for information for themselves.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

0.028136378 = product of:
  0.042204566 = sum of:
    0.03230502 = weight(_text_:development in 34) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03230502 = score(doc=34,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16011542 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04384008 = queryNorm
        0.20176083 = fieldWeight in 34, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=34)
    0.009899544 = product of:
      0.029698629 = sum of:
        0.029698629 = weight(_text_:22 in 34) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029698629 = score(doc=34,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1535205 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04384008 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 34, 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=34)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

For laypeople, searching online health information resources can be challenging due to topic complexity and the large number of online sources with differing quality. The goal of this article is to examine, among all the available online sources, which online sources laypeople select to address their health-related information needs, and whether or how much the severity of a health condition influences their selection. Twenty-four participants were recruited individually, and each was asked (using a retrieval system called HIS) to search for information regarding a severe health condition and a mild health condition, respectively. The selected online health information sources were automatically captured by the HIS system and classified at both the website and webpage levels. Participants' selection behavior patterns were then plotted across the whole information-seeking process. Our results demonstrate that laypeople's source selection fluctuates during the health information-seeking process, and also varies by the severity of health conditions. This study reveals laypeople's real usage of different types of online health information sources, and engenders implications to the design of search engines, as well as the development of health literacy programs.

Date

12.11.2020 13:22:09

0.028136378 = product of:
  0.042204566 = sum of:
    0.03230502 = weight(_text_:development in 884) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03230502 = score(doc=884,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16011542 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04384008 = queryNorm
        0.20176083 = fieldWeight in 884, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=884)
    0.009899544 = product of:
      0.029698629 = sum of:
        0.029698629 = weight(_text_:22 in 884) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029698629 = score(doc=884,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1535205 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04384008 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 884, 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=884)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Research information management systems (RIMS) have become critical components of information technology infrastructure on university campuses. They are used not just for sharing and promoting faculty research, but also for conducting faculty evaluation and development, facilitating research collaborations, identifying mentors for student projects, and expert consultants for local businesses. This study is one of the first empirical investigations of the structure of researchers' scholarly profile maintenance activities in a nonmandatory institutional RIMS. By analyzing the RIMS's log data, we identified 11 tasks researchers performed when updating their profiles. These tasks were further grouped into three activities: (a) adding publication, (b) enhancing researcher identity, and (c) improving research discoverability. In addition, we found that junior researchers and female researchers were more engaged in maintaining their RIMS profiles than senior researchers and male researchers. The results provide insights for designing profile maintenance action templates for institutional RIMS that are tailored to researchers' characteristics and help enhance researchers' engagement in the curation of their research information. This also suggests that female and junior researchers can serve as early adopters of institutional RIMS.

Date

22. 1.2023 18:43:02

0.028136378 = product of:
  0.042204566 = sum of:
    0.03230502 = weight(_text_:development in 1097) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03230502 = score(doc=1097,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16011542 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04384008 = queryNorm
        0.20176083 = fieldWeight in 1097, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1097)
    0.009899544 = product of:
      0.029698629 = sum of:
        0.029698629 = weight(_text_:22 in 1097) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029698629 = score(doc=1097,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1535205 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04384008 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1097, 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=1097)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Against the background that the top-level semantic framework of Chinese traditional culture is not comprehensive and unified, this study aims to preserve and disseminate cultural heritage information about Chinese traditional culture through the development of a domain ontology which is constructed from ancient books. A combination of top-down and bottom-up approaches was used to construct the ontology for Chinese traditional culture (CTCO). An investigation of historians' needs, and LDA topic clustering model were conducted, understanding the specific needs of historians, collecting the topic, concepts and relationships. CIDOC CRM was reused to construct the basic framework of CTCO. Ontology structure and function were adopted to evaluate the effectiveness of CTCO. Evaluation results show that the ontology meets all the quality criteria of OntoMetrics, and the experts agreed on content representation (average score = 4.30). CTCO contributes to the organization of traditional Chinese culture and the construction of related databases. The study also forms a common path and puts forward proposals for the construction of domain ontology, which has great social relevance.

Source

Knowledge organization. 49(2022) no.1, S.22 - 39

0.02611184 = product of:
  0.078335516 = sum of:
    0.078335516 = weight(_text_:development in 5756) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.078335516 = score(doc=5756,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.16011542 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04384008 = queryNorm
        0.48924404 = fieldWeight in 5756, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5756)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The Korean Decimal Classification (KDC) is a national standard classification system of the Korean library community published and maintained by the Classification Committee of the Korean Library Association. This article examines its general history from its advent to the latest edition (KDC 6), its usage, external characteristics including format and layout, internal principles and characteristics including outline and classificatory principles applied, general aspects of the schedule and the major tables, development and maintenance, and general evaluation. It concludes with some ideas and recommendations for future research and development.

0.02320989 = product of:
  0.06962967 = sum of:
    0.06962967 = product of:
      0.208889 = sum of:
        0.208889 = weight(_text_:3a in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.208889 = score(doc=862,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.37167668 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04384008 = queryNorm
            0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 862, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=862)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

https%3A%2F%2Farxiv.org%2Fabs%2F2212.06721&usg=AOvVaw3i_9pZm9y_dQWoHi6uv0EN

0.022509102 = product of:
  0.03376365 = sum of:
    0.025844015 = weight(_text_:development in 566) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025844015 = score(doc=566,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16011542 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04384008 = queryNorm
        0.16140866 = fieldWeight in 566, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=566)
    0.007919635 = product of:
      0.023758903 = sum of:
        0.023758903 = weight(_text_:22 in 566) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023758903 = score(doc=566,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1535205 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04384008 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 566, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=566)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Knowledge Architectures reviews traditional approaches to managing information and explains why they need to adapt to support 21st-century information management and discovery. Exploring the rapidly changing environment in which information is being managed and accessed, the book considers how to use knowledge architectures, the basic structures and designs that underlie all of the parts of an effective information system, to best advantage. Drawing on 40 years of work with a variety of organizations, Bedford explains that failure to understand the structure behind any given system can be the difference between an effective solution and a significant and costly failure. Demonstrating that the information user environment has shifted significantly in the past 20 years, the book explains that end users now expect designs and behaviors that are much closer to the way they think, work, and act. Acknowledging how important it is that those responsible for developing an information or knowledge management system understand knowledge structures, the book goes beyond a traditional library science perspective and uses case studies to help translate the abstract and theoretical to the practical and concrete. Explaining the structures in a simple and intuitive way and providing examples that clearly illustrate the challenges faced by a range of different organizations, Knowledge Architectures is essential reading for those studying and working in library and information science, data science, systems development, database design, and search system architecture and engineering.

Content

Section 1 Context and purpose of knowledge architecture -- 1 Making the case for knowledge architecture -- 2 The landscape of knowledge assets -- 3 Knowledge architecture and design -- 4 Knowledge architecture reference model -- 5 Knowledge architecture segments -- Section 2 Designing for availability -- 6 Knowledge object modeling -- 7 Knowledge structures for encoding, formatting, and packaging -- 8 Functional architecture for identification and distinction -- 9 Functional architectures for knowledge asset disposition and destruction -- 10 Functional architecture designs for knowledge preservation and conservation -- Section 3 Designing for accessibility -- 11 Functional architectures for knowledge seeking and discovery -- 12 Functional architecture for knowledge search -- 13 Functional architecture for knowledge categorization -- 14 Functional architectures for indexing and keywording -- 15 Functional architecture for knowledge semantics -- 16 Functional architecture for knowledge abstraction and surrogation -- Section 4 Functional architectures to support knowledge consumption -- 17 Functional architecture for knowledge augmentation, derivation, and synthesis -- 18 Functional architecture to manage risk and harm -- 19 Functional architectures for knowledge authentication and provenance -- 20 Functional architectures for securing knowledge assets -- 21 Functional architectures for authorization and asset management -- Section 5 Pulling it all together - the big picture knowledge architecture -- 22 Functional architecture for knowledge metadata and metainformation -- 23 The whole knowledge architecture - pulling it all together

0.022381578 = product of:
  0.06714473 = sum of:
    0.06714473 = weight(_text_:development in 1150) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06714473 = score(doc=1150,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.16011542 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04384008 = queryNorm
        0.41935202 = fieldWeight in 1150, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.652261 = idf(docFreq=3116, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1150)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This is an overview of the development of FAST (Faceted Application of Subject Terminology) from its inception in the late 1990s, through its development and implementation to the work being undertaken by OCLC and the FAST Policy and Outreach Committee (FPOC) to develop and promote FAST. FPOC members explain how FAST is used by institutions in Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States. They cover their experience of implementing FAST and the benefits they have derived. The final section considers the value of FAST as a faceted vocabulary and the potential for future development and linked data.