Search (26 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × author_ss:"Beghtol, C."
  1. Beghtol, C.: ¬The classification of fiction : the development of a system based on theoretical principles (1994) 0.03 
    0.031562172 = product of:
  0.07364506 = sum of:
    0.041434746 = weight(_text_:systems in 3413) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041434746 = score(doc=3413,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12327058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04011181 = queryNorm
        0.33612844 = fieldWeight in 3413, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3413)
    0.010762575 = product of:
      0.02152515 = sum of:
        0.02152515 = weight(_text_:science in 3413) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02152515 = score(doc=3413,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10565929 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04011181 = queryNorm
            0.20372227 = fieldWeight in 3413, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3413)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.02144774 = weight(_text_:library in 3413) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02144774 = score(doc=3413,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10546913 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04011181 = queryNorm
        0.20335563 = fieldWeight in 3413, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3413)
  0.42857143 = coord(3/7)
    Abstract
    The work is an adaptation of the author's dissertation and has the following chapters: (1) background and introduction; (2) a problem in classification theory; (3) previous fiction analysis theories and systems and 'The left hand of darkness'; (4) fiction warrant and critical warrant; (5) experimental fiction analysis system (EFAS); (6) application and evaluation of EFAS. Appendix 1 gives references to fiction analysis systems and appendix 2 lists EFAS coding sheets
    Footnote
    Rez. in: Knowledge organization 21(1994) no.3, S.165-167 (W. Bies); JASIS 46(1995) no.5, S.389-390 (E.G. Bierbaum); Canadian journal of information and library science 20(1995) nos.3/4, S.52-53 (L. Rees-Potter)
  2. Beghtol, C.: Within, among, between : three faces of interdisciplinarity (1995) 0.03 
    0.02827162 = product of:
  0.06596711 = sum of:
    0.02929879 = weight(_text_:systems in 1297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02929879 = score(doc=1297,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12327058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04011181 = queryNorm
        0.23767869 = fieldWeight in 1297, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1297)
    0.01522058 = product of:
      0.03044116 = sum of:
        0.03044116 = weight(_text_:science in 1297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03044116 = score(doc=1297,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.10565929 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04011181 = queryNorm
            0.2881068 = fieldWeight in 1297, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1297)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.02144774 = weight(_text_:library in 1297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02144774 = score(doc=1297,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10546913 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04011181 = queryNorm
        0.20335563 = fieldWeight in 1297, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1297)
  0.42857143 = coord(3/7)
    Abstract
    Interdisciplinarity is a means by which the unit of information and the separateness of disciplines can work together harmoniously. Characterizes disciplinarity and the role of information science in serving other disciplines as well as its own discipline. Interdisciplinarity relationships occur among all knowledge seeking disciplines, (including LIS), and those between LIS and every other filed of knowledge production, utilization and practical action. Considers how LIS can promote interdisciplinarity relationships and research
    Imprint
    Alberta : Alberta University, School of Library and Information Studies
    Source
    Connectedness: information, systems, people, organizations. Proceedings of CAIS/ACSI 95, the proceedings of the 23rd Annual Conference of the Canadian Association for Information Science. Ed. by Hope A. Olson and Denis B. Ward
  3. Beghtol, C.: Exploring new approaches to the organization of knowledge : the subject classification of James Duff Brown (2004) 0.03 
    0.025858672 = product of:
  0.060336903 = sum of:
    0.02511325 = weight(_text_:systems in 869) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02511325 = score(doc=869,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12327058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04011181 = queryNorm
        0.2037246 = fieldWeight in 869, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=869)
    0.009225064 = product of:
      0.018450128 = sum of:
        0.018450128 = weight(_text_:science in 869) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018450128 = score(doc=869,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10565929 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04011181 = queryNorm
            0.17461908 = fieldWeight in 869, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=869)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.025998589 = weight(_text_:library in 869) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025998589 = score(doc=869,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.10546913 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04011181 = queryNorm
        0.24650425 = fieldWeight in 869, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=869)
  0.42857143 = coord(3/7)
    Abstract
    James Duff Brown was an influential and energetic librarian in Great Britain in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. His Subject Classification has characteristics that were unusual and idiosyncratic during his own time, but his work deserves recognition as one of the precursors of modern bibliographic classification systems. This article discusses a number of theories and classification practices that Brown developed. In particular, it investigates his views on the order of main classes, on the phenomenon of "concrete" subjects, and on the need for synthesized notations. It traces these ideas briefly into the future through the work of S. R. Ranganathan, the Classification Research Group, and the second edition of the Bliss Bibliographic Classification system. It concludes that Brown's work warrants further study for the light it may shed on current classification theory and practice.
    Footnote
    Beitrag in einem Themenheft: Pioneers in library and information science
    Source
    Library trends. 52(2004) no.4, S.702-718
  4. Beghtol, C.: Ethical decision-making for knowledge representation and organization systems for global use (2005) 0.02 
    0.021793332 = product of:
  0.07627666 = sum of:
    0.06551409 = weight(_text_:systems in 1648) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06551409 = score(doc=1648,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.12327058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04011181 = queryNorm
        0.5314657 = fieldWeight in 1648, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1648)
    0.010762575 = product of:
      0.02152515 = sum of:
        0.02152515 = weight(_text_:science in 1648) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02152515 = score(doc=1648,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10565929 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04011181 = queryNorm
            0.20372227 = fieldWeight in 1648, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1648)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Abstract
    In this article, ethical decision-making methods for creating, revising, and maintaining knowledge representation and organization systems are described, particularly in relation to the global use of these systems. The analysis uses a three-level model and the literature on ethically based decision-making in the social and technical sciences. In addition, methods for making these kinds of decisions in an ethical manner are presented. This multidisciplinary approach is generalizable to other information areas and is useful for encouraging the development of ethics policies for knowledge representation and organization systems and for other kinds of systems or institutions.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 56(2005) no.9, S.903-912
  5. Beghtol, C.: Classification theory (2010) 0.02 
    0.019856002 = product of:
  0.069496006 = sum of:
    0.04349742 = weight(_text_:systems in 3761) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04349742 = score(doc=3761,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.12327058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04011181 = queryNorm
        0.35286134 = fieldWeight in 3761, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3761)
    0.025998589 = weight(_text_:library in 3761) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025998589 = score(doc=3761,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.10546913 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04011181 = queryNorm
        0.24650425 = fieldWeight in 3761, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3761)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Abstract
    In the library and information sciences, classification theories are used primarily for knowledge organization, either in a manual or in a machine environment. In this context, classification theories have usually been developed initially as a support for specific knowledge organization classification systems, although the theories and the systems have influenced and re-influenced each other in particular ways throughout their lives. This entry discusses theories for knowledge organization classifications using examples from a number of classification systems, but no one system is discussed at length. Instead, the entry is organized into sections that deal first with classificatory issues in general and then with theories of content, theories of structure, and theories of notation for knowledge organization classifications.
    Source
    Encyclopedia of library and information sciences. 3rd ed. Ed.: M.J. Bates
  6. Beghtol, C.: Semantic validity : concepts of warrants in bibliographic classification systems (1986) 0.02 
    0.019023433 = product of:
  0.06658202 = sum of:
    0.0512622 = weight(_text_:systems in 3487) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0512622 = score(doc=3487,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.12327058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04011181 = queryNorm
        0.41585106 = fieldWeight in 3487, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3487)
    0.015319815 = weight(_text_:library in 3487) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015319815 = score(doc=3487,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10546913 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04011181 = queryNorm
        0.14525402 = fieldWeight in 3487, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3487)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Abstract
    This paper argues that the semantic axis of bibliographic classification systems can be found in the various warrants that have been used to justify the utility of classification systems. Classificationists, theorists, and critics have emphasized the syntactic aspects of classification theories and systems, but a number of semantic warrants can be identified. The evolution of four semantic warrants is traced through the development of twentieth-century classification theory: literary warrant, scientific/philosophical warrant, educational warrant, and cultural warrant. It is concluded that further examination of semantic warrants might make possible a rationalized approach to the creation of classification systems for particular uses. The attention of scholars on faceted schemes and classificatory structures had heretofore pulled our attention to the syntactic aspects (e.g., concept division and citation order), with semantics being considered more or less a question of the terms and their relationships and somewhat taken for granted, or at least construed as a unitary aspect. Attention is on the choice of the classes and their meaning, as well as their connection to the world, and not so much on their syntactic relationship. This notion is developed by providing an historical and conceptual overview of the various kinds of warrant discernible in working with bibliographic systems. In Beghtol's definition, warrant concerns more than just the selection of terms, but rather the mapping of a classification system to the context and uses.
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 30(1986), S.109-125
  7. Beghtol, C.: Relationships in classificatory structure and meaning (2001) 0.02 
    0.018679999 = product of:
  0.06537999 = sum of:
    0.05615493 = weight(_text_:systems in 1138) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05615493 = score(doc=1138,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.12327058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04011181 = queryNorm
        0.45554203 = fieldWeight in 1138, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1138)
    0.009225064 = product of:
      0.018450128 = sum of:
        0.018450128 = weight(_text_:science in 1138) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018450128 = score(doc=1138,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10565929 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04011181 = queryNorm
            0.17461908 = fieldWeight in 1138, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1138)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Abstract
    In a changing information environment, we need to reassess each element of bibliographic control, including classification theories and systems. Every classification system is a theoretical construct imposed an "reality." The classificatory relationships that are assumed to be valuable have generally received less attention than the topics included in the systems. Relationships are functions of both the syntactic and semantic axes of classification systems, and both explicit and implicit relationships are discussed. Examples are drawn from a number of different systems, both bibliographic and non-bibliographic, and the cultural warrant (i. e., the sociocultural context) of classification systems is examined. The part-whole relationship is discussed as an example of a universally valid concept that is treated as a component of the cultural warrant of a classification system.
    Series
    Information science and knowledge management; vol.2
  8. Beghtol, C.: Within, among, between : three faces of interdisciplinarity (1996) 0.02 
    0.018405896 = product of:
  0.06442063 = sum of:
    0.02152515 = product of:
      0.0430503 = sum of:
        0.0430503 = weight(_text_:science in 6084) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0430503 = score(doc=6084,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10565929 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04011181 = queryNorm
            0.40744454 = fieldWeight in 6084, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6084)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.04289548 = weight(_text_:library in 6084) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04289548 = score(doc=6084,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10546913 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04011181 = queryNorm
        0.40671125 = fieldWeight in 6084, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6084)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Source
    Canadian journal of information and library science. 20(1996) no.2, S.30-41
  9. Beghtol, C.: From the universe of knowledge to the universe of concepts : the structural revolution in classification for information retrieval (2008) 0.01 
    0.01473362 = product of:
  0.051567666 = sum of:
    0.036247853 = weight(_text_:systems in 1856) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.036247853 = score(doc=1856,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.12327058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04011181 = queryNorm
        0.29405114 = fieldWeight in 1856, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1856)
    0.015319815 = weight(_text_:library in 1856) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015319815 = score(doc=1856,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10546913 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04011181 = queryNorm
        0.14525402 = fieldWeight in 1856, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1856)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Abstract
    During the twentieth century, bibliographic classification theory underwent a structural revolution. The first modern bibliographic classifications were top-down systems that started at the universe of knowledge and subdivided that universe downward to minute subclasses. After the invention of faceted classification by S.R. Ranganathan, the ideal was to build bottom-up classifications that started with the universe of concepts and built upward to larger and larger faceted classes. This ideal has not been achieved, and the two kinds of classification systems are not mutually exclusive. This paper examines the process by which this structural revolution was accomplished by looking at the spread of facet theory after 1924 when Ranganathan attended the School of Librarianship, London, through selected classification textbooks that were published after that date. To this end, the paper examines the role of W.C.B. Sayers as a teacher and author of three editions of The Manual of Classification for Librarians and Bibliographers. Sayers influenced both Ranganathan and the various members of the Classification Research Group (CRG) who were his students. Further, the paper contrasts the methods of evaluating classification systems that arose between Sayers's Canons of Classification in 1915- 1916 and J. Mills's A Modern Outline of Library Classification in 1960 in order to demonstrate the speed with which one kind of classificatory structure was overtaken by another.
  10. Beghtol, C.: Naïve classification systems and the global information society (2004) 0.01 
    0.014238385 = product of:
  0.049834345 = sum of:
    0.036247853 = weight(_text_:systems in 3483) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.036247853 = score(doc=3483,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.12327058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04011181 = queryNorm
        0.29405114 = fieldWeight in 3483, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3483)
    0.013586491 = product of:
      0.027172983 = sum of:
        0.027172983 = weight(_text_:22 in 3483) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027172983 = score(doc=3483,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14046472 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04011181 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3483, 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=3483)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Abstract
    Classification is an activity that transcends time and space and that bridges the divisions between different languages and cultures, including the divisions between academic disciplines. Classificatory activity, however, serves different purposes in different situations. Classifications for infonnation retrieval can be called "professional" classifications and classifications in other fields can be called "naïve" classifications because they are developed by people who have no particular interest in classificatory issues. The general purpose of naïve classification systems is to discover new knowledge. In contrast, the general purpose of information retrieval classifications is to classify pre-existing knowledge. Different classificatory purposes may thus inform systems that are intended to span the cultural specifics of the globalized information society. This paper builds an previous research into the purposes and characteristics of naïve classifications. It describes some of the relationships between the purpose and context of a naive classification, the units of analysis used in it, and the theory that the context and the units of analysis imply.
    Pages
    S.19-22
  11. Beghtol, C.: ¬The facet concept as a universal principle of subdivision (2006) 0.01 
    0.013855011 = product of:
  0.048492536 = sum of:
    0.02929879 = weight(_text_:systems in 1483) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02929879 = score(doc=1483,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12327058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04011181 = queryNorm
        0.23767869 = fieldWeight in 1483, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1483)
    0.019193748 = product of:
      0.038387496 = sum of:
        0.038387496 = weight(_text_:29 in 1483) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038387496 = score(doc=1483,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14110081 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04011181 = queryNorm
            0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 1483, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1483)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Date
    29. 2.2008 19:19:30
    Source
    Knowledge organization, information systems and other essays: Professor A. Neelameghan Festschrift. Ed. by K.S. Raghavan and K.N. Prasad
  12. Beghtol, C.: ¬The Iter Bibliography : International standard subject access to medieval and renaissance materials (400-1700) (2003) 0.01 
    0.01084855 = product of:
  0.037969925 = sum of:
    0.016742166 = weight(_text_:systems in 3965) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016742166 = score(doc=3965,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12327058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04011181 = queryNorm
        0.1358164 = fieldWeight in 3965, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3965)
    0.021227758 = weight(_text_:library in 3965) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021227758 = score(doc=3965,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.10546913 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04011181 = queryNorm
        0.20126988 = fieldWeight in 3965, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3965)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Abstract
    Iter ("journey" or "path" in Latin) is a non-profit project for providing electronic access to materials pertaining to the Middle Ages and Renaissance (400-1700). Iter's background is described, and its centrepiece, the Iter Bibliography, is explicated. Emphasis is an the subject cataloguing process and an subject access to records for journal articles (using Library of Congress Subject Headings and the Dewey Decimal Classification). Basic subject analysis of the materials is provided by graduate students specializing in the Middle Ages and Renaissance periods, and, subsequently, subject access points systems are provided by information professionals. This close cooperation between subject and information experts would not be efficient without electronic capabilities.
    Content
    "1. Iter: Gateway to the Middle Ages and Renaissance Iter is a non-profit research project dedicated to providing electronic access to all kinds and formats of materials pertaining to the Middle Ages and Renaissance (400-1700). Iter began in 1995 as a joint initiative of the Renaissance Society of America (RSA) in New York City and the Centre for Reformation and Renaissance Studies (CRRS), Univ. of Toronto. By 1997, three more partners had joined: Faculty of Information Studies (FIS), Univ. of Toronto; Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies (ACMRS), Arizona State Univ. at Tempe; and John P. Robarts Library, Univ. of Toronto. Iter was funded initially by the five partners and major foundations and, since 1998, has offered low-cost subscriptions to institutions and individuals. When Iter becomes financially self-sufficient, any profits will be used to enhance and expand the project. Iter databases are housed and maintained at the John P. Robarts Library. The interface is a customized version of DRA WebZ. A new interface using DRA Web can be searched now and will replace the DRA WebZ interface shortly. Iter was originally conceived as a comprehensive bibliography of secondary materials that would be an alternative to the existing commercial research tools for its period. These were expensive, generally appeared several years late, had limited subject indexing, were inconsistent in coverage, of uneven quality, and often depended an fragile networks of volunteers for identification of materials. The production of a reasonably priced, web-based, timely research tool was Iter's first priority. In addition, the partners wanted to involve graduate students in the project in order to contribute to the scholarly training and financial support of future scholars of the Middle Ages and Renaissance and to utilize as much automation as possible."
  13. Beghtol, C.: Domain analysis, literary warrant, and consensus : the case of fiction studies (1995) 0.01 
    0.009810947 = product of:
  0.034338314 = sum of:
    0.02511325 = weight(_text_:systems in 7728) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02511325 = score(doc=7728,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12327058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04011181 = queryNorm
        0.2037246 = fieldWeight in 7728, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7728)
    0.009225064 = product of:
      0.018450128 = sum of:
        0.018450128 = weight(_text_:science in 7728) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018450128 = score(doc=7728,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10565929 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04011181 = queryNorm
            0.17461908 = fieldWeight in 7728, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7728)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Abstract
    This article reports research that used descriptor subfields in MLA Bibliography online to quantify literary warrant in the domain of scholarly work about fiction (i.e., 'fiction studies'). The research used Hulme's concept of literary warrant and Kernan's description of the interactive processes of literature and literary scholarship to justify quantifying existing subject indexing in existing bibliographic records as a first step in the domain analysis of a field. It was found that certain of the MLA Bibliography onle's descriptor subfields and certain of the descriptor terms within those subfields occured more often than would occur by chance. The techniques used in the research might be extended to domain analysis of other fields. Use of the methodology might improve the ability to evaluate existing and to design future subject access systems
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 46(1995) no.1, S.30-44
  14. Beghtol, C.: ¬A proposed ethical warrant for global knowledge representation and organization systems (2002) 0.01 
    0.009491917 = product of:
  0.06644341 = sum of:
    0.06644341 = weight(_text_:systems in 4462) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06644341 = score(doc=4462,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.12327058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04011181 = queryNorm
        0.5390046 = fieldWeight in 4462, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4462)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Abstract
    New technologies have made the increased globalization of information resources and services possible. In this situation, it is ethically and intellectually beneficial to protect cultural and information diversity. This paper analyzes the problems of creating ethically based globally accessible and culturally acceptable knowledge representation and organization systems, and foundation principles for the ethical treatment of different cultures are established on the basis of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). The concept of "cultural hospitality", which can act as a theoretical framework for the ethical warrant of knowledge representation and organization systems, is described. This broad discussion is grounded with an extended example of one cultural universal, the concept of time and its expression in calendars. Methods of achieving cultural and user hospitality in information systems are discussed for their potential for creating ethically based systems. It is concluded that cultural hospitality is a promising concept for assessing the ethical foundations of new knowledge representation and organization systems and for planning revisions to existing systems.
  15. Beghtol, C.: Knowledge domains : multidisciplinarity and bibliographic classification systems (1998) 0.01 
    0.008787806 = product of:
  0.061514642 = sum of:
    0.061514642 = weight(_text_:systems in 2028) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.061514642 = score(doc=2028,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.12327058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04011181 = queryNorm
        0.4990213 = fieldWeight in 2028, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2028)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Abstract
    Bibliographic classification systems purport to organize the world of knowledge for information storage and retrieval purposes in libraries and bibliographies, both manual and online. The major systems that have predominated during the 20th century were originally predicated on the academic disciplines. This structural principle is no longer adequate because multidisciplinray knowledge production has overtaken more traditional disciplinary perspectives and produced communities of cooperation whose documents cannot be accomodated in a disciplinary structure. This paper addresses the problems the major classifications face, reports some attempts to revise these systems to accomodate multidisciplinary works more appropriately, and describes some theoretical research perspectives that attempt to reorient classification research toward the pluralistic needs of multidisciplinary knowledge creation and the perspectives of different discourse communities. Traditionally, the primary desiderata of classification systems were mutual exclusivity and joint exhaustivity. The need to respond to multidisciplinary research may mean that hospitality will replace mutual exclusivity and joint exhaustivity as the most needed and useful characteristics of classification systems in both theory and practice
  16. Beghtol, C.: 'Itself an education' classification systems, theory, and research in the information studies curriculum (1997) 0.01 
    0.0072495705 = product of:
  0.050746992 = sum of:
    0.050746992 = weight(_text_:systems in 666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050746992 = score(doc=666,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.12327058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04011181 = queryNorm
        0.41167158 = fieldWeight in 666, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=666)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Abstract
    The interdisciplinary field of information studies requires an eclectic and imaginative curriculum. Future information professionals need intellectual tools that will enable them to adapt to changed social and technological environments. In this situation, the study of classification, including both principles application for current bibliographic systems and principles of construction that could be used to develop new systems for bibliographic and non bibliographic materials, is one way to equip students with the balanced flexibility to adapt to changing needs. Knowledge of the organization of knowledge is basic to any kind of information work
  17. Beghtol, C.: General classification systems : structural principles for multidisciplinary specification (1998) 0.01 
    0.0071752146 = product of:
  0.0502265 = sum of:
    0.0502265 = weight(_text_:systems in 44) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0502265 = score(doc=44,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.12327058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04011181 = queryNorm
        0.4074492 = fieldWeight in 44, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=44)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Abstract
    In this century, knowledge creation, production, dissemination and use have changed profoundly. Intellectual and physical barriers have been substantially reduced by the rise of multidisciplinarity and by the influence of computerization, particularly by the spread of the World Wide Web (WWW). Bibliographic classification systems need to respond to this situation. Three possible strategic responses are described: 1) adopting an existing system; 2) adapting an existing system; and 3) finding new structural principles for classification systems. Examples of these three responses are given. An extended example of the third option uses the knowledge outline in the Spectrum of Britannica Online to suggest a theory of "viewpoint warrant" that could be used to incorporate differing perspectives into general classification systems
  18. Beghtol, C.: ¬The global learning society and the iterative relationship between theory and practice in knowledge organization systems (2006) 0.01 
    0.006685111 = product of:
  0.046795778 = sum of:
    0.046795778 = weight(_text_:systems in 2517) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.046795778 = score(doc=2517,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.12327058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04011181 = queryNorm
        0.37961838 = fieldWeight in 2517, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2517)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Abstract
    In the global learning society, we need to understand how knowledge is transferred within one field and among different fields. In addition, we need to know how to create an atmosphere of tolerance for different points of view. One way of achieving understanding between different cultures and from different vantage points within the same culture is to study the relationship(s) between theory and practice. For this purpose, it is useful to understand the relationship(s) among ideas, how initial ideas migrate into practice and back into theory, and how "best practices" are identified and become widespread. In this paper, knowledge organization systems are used as examples of how knowledge organization systems are created, how knowledge of the systems may be disseminated, and how that new knowledge is integrated into accepted theory and practice. This examination provides clues about the development of theories and practices that can enhance the contributions knowledge organization systems make to the global learning society.
  19. Beghtol, C.: Universal concepts, cultural warrant and cultural hospitality (2003) 0.01 
    0.0062139174 = product of:
  0.04349742 = sum of:
    0.04349742 = weight(_text_:systems in 2681) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04349742 = score(doc=2681,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.12327058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04011181 = queryNorm
        0.35286134 = fieldWeight in 2681, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2681)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Abstract
    The problem of how to provide access to information regardless of linguistic or other domain boundaries or cultural traditions can be approached by examining how cultural universals are implemented in specific cultures at specific times and places. The universal concept of "time" and its implementation in calendars is used as an illustration, and how time is treated in knowledge organization systems is briefly described. A broadened definition for the concept of "hospitality" is proposed for use in evaluating the efficacy of knowledge organization systems. The identification of the complementary concept of "cultural hospitality" provides a theoretical framework to inform decisions about the types of access that can (and/or should) be provided by knowledge organization systems that purport to be globally useful and ethically balanced.
  20. Beghtol, C.: ¬A whole, its kinds, and its parts (2000) 0.00 
    0.0047834762 = product of:
  0.033484332 = sum of:
    0.033484332 = weight(_text_:systems in 91) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033484332 = score(doc=91,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12327058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04011181 = queryNorm
        0.2716328 = fieldWeight in 91, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=91)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Abstract
    Different types of subdivision may be used throughout the same classification system. This paper presents exploratory research into "wholes", "kinds" and "parts" as they relate to the theory and practice of bibliographic classification. Some problems of consistently identifying different kinds of subdivision and of the ambiguities of their relationships are discussed. Some implications of these issues for dynamism and stability in classification systems are addressed

Years

Languages

  • e 25
  • i 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 25
  • m 1
  • More… Less…

Themes