-
Gnoli, C.; Poli, R.: Levels of reality and levels of representation (2004)
0.02
0.015213685 = product of:
0.10649579 = sum of:
0.07118073 = weight(_text_:mental in 3533) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07118073 = score(doc=3533,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16438161 = queryWeight, product of:
6.532101 = idf(docFreq=174, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.43302125 = fieldWeight in 3533, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.532101 = idf(docFreq=174, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3533)
0.03531506 = weight(_text_:representation in 3533) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03531506 = score(doc=3533,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11578492 = queryWeight, product of:
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.3050057 = fieldWeight in 3533, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3533)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- Ontology, in its philosophical meaning, is the discipline investigating the structure of reality. Its findings can be relevant to knowledge organization, and models of knowledge can, in turn, offer relevant ontological suggestions. Several philosophers in time have pointed out that reality is structured into a series of integrative levels, like the physical, the biological, the mental, and the cultural, and that each level plays as a base for the emergence of more complex levels. More detailed theories of levels have been developed by Nicolai Hartmann and James K. Feibleman, and these have been considered as a source for structuring principles in bibliographic classification by both the Classification Research Group (CRG) and Ingetraut Dahlberg. CRG's analysis of levels and of their possible application to a new general classification scheme based an phenomena instead of disciplines, as it was formulated by Derek Austin in 1969, is examined in detail. Both benefits and open problems in applying integrative levels to bibliographic classification are pointed out.
-
Qin, J.: Evolving paradigms of knowledge representation and organization : a comparative study of classification, XML/DTD and ontology (2003)
0.01
0.009547995 = product of:
0.06683596 = sum of:
0.062289912 = weight(_text_:representation in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.062289912 = score(doc=2763,freq=14.0), product of:
0.11578492 = queryWeight, product of:
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.5379795 = fieldWeight in 2763, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2763)
0.004546049 = product of:
0.013638147 = sum of:
0.013638147 = weight(_text_:22 in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013638147 = score(doc=2763,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08812423 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2763, 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=2763)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- The different points of views an knowledge representation and organization from various research communities reflect underlying philosophies and paradigms in these communities. This paper reviews differences and relations in knowledge representation and organization and generalizes four paradigms-integrative and disintegrative pragmatism and integrative and disintegrative epistemologism. Examples such as classification, XML schemas, and ontologies are compared based an how they specify concepts, build data models, and encode knowledge organization structures. 1. Introduction Knowledge representation (KR) is a term that several research communities use to refer to somewhat different aspects of the same research area. The artificial intelligence (AI) community considers KR as simply "something to do with writing down, in some language or communications medium, descriptions or pictures that correspond in some salient way to the world or a state of the world" (Duce & Ringland, 1988, p. 3). It emphasizes the ways in which knowledge can be encoded in a computer program (Bench-Capon, 1990). For the library and information science (LIS) community, KR is literally the synonym of knowledge organization, i.e., KR is referred to as the process of organizing knowledge into classifications, thesauri, or subject heading lists. KR has another meaning in LIS: it "encompasses every type and method of indexing, abstracting, cataloguing, classification, records management, bibliography and the creation of textual or bibliographic databases for information retrieval" (Anderson, 1996, p. 336). Adding the social dimension to knowledge organization, Hjoerland (1997) states that knowledge is a part of human activities and tied to the division of labor in society, which should be the primary organization of knowledge. Knowledge organization in LIS is secondary or derived, because knowledge is organized in learned institutions and publications. These different points of views an KR suggest that an essential difference in the understanding of KR between both AI and LIS lies in the source of representationwhether KR targets human activities or derivatives (knowledge produced) from human activities. This difference also decides their difference in purpose-in AI KR is mainly computer-application oriented or pragmatic and the result of representation is used to support decisions an human activities, while in LIS KR is conceptually oriented or abstract and the result of representation is used for access to derivatives from human activities.
- Date
- 12. 9.2004 17:22:35
- Source
- Challenges in knowledge representation and organization for the 21st century: Integration of knowledge across boundaries. Proceedings of the 7th ISKO International Conference Granada, Spain, July 10-13, 2002. Ed.: M. López-Huertas
-
Slavic, A.; Cordeiro, M.I.: Core requirements for automation of analytico-synthetic classifications (2004)
0.01
0.008117716 = product of:
0.05682401 = sum of:
0.049943037 = weight(_text_:representation in 2651) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049943037 = score(doc=2651,freq=4.0), product of:
0.11578492 = queryWeight, product of:
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.4313432 = fieldWeight in 2651, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2651)
0.006880972 = product of:
0.020642916 = sum of:
0.020642916 = weight(_text_:29 in 2651) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020642916 = score(doc=2651,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08852329 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 2651, 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=2651)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- The paper analyses the importance of data presentation and modelling and its role in improving the management, use and exchange of analytico-synthetic classifications in automated systems. Inefficiencies, in this respect, hinder the automation of classification systems that offer the possibility of building compound index/search terms. The lack of machine readable data expressing the semantics and structure of a classification vocabulary has negative effects on information management and retrieval, thus restricting the potential of both automated systems and classifications themselves. The authors analysed the data representation structure of three general analytico-synthetic classification systems (BC2-Bliss Bibliographic Classification; BSO-Broad System of Ordering; UDC-Universal Decimal Classification) and put forward some core requirements for classification data representation
- Date
- 29. 8.2004 14:20:40
-
Poli, R.: Framing information (2003)
0.01
0.00803734 = product of:
0.05626138 = sum of:
0.04708675 = weight(_text_:representation in 2711) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04708675 = score(doc=2711,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11578492 = queryWeight, product of:
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.40667427 = fieldWeight in 2711, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2711)
0.00917463 = product of:
0.027523888 = sum of:
0.027523888 = weight(_text_:29 in 2711) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027523888 = score(doc=2711,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08852329 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 2711, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2711)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Date
- 11. 9.2004 15:29:04
- Source
- Challenges in knowledge representation and organization for the 21st century: Integration of knowledge across boundaries. Proceedings of the 7th ISKO International Conference Granada, Spain, July 10-13, 2002. Ed.: M. López-Huertas
-
Cordeiro, M.I.; Slavic, A.: Data models for knowledge organization tools : evolution and perspectives (2003)
0.01
0.006028005 = product of:
0.04219603 = sum of:
0.03531506 = weight(_text_:representation in 2632) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03531506 = score(doc=2632,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11578492 = queryWeight, product of:
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.3050057 = fieldWeight in 2632, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2632)
0.006880972 = product of:
0.020642916 = sum of:
0.020642916 = weight(_text_:29 in 2632) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020642916 = score(doc=2632,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08852329 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 2632, 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=2632)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Date
- 29. 8.2004 9:26:23
- Source
- Challenges in knowledge representation and organization for the 21st century: Integration of knowledge across boundaries. Proceedings of the 7th ISKO International Conference Granada, Spain, July 10-13, 2002. Ed.: M. López-Huertas
-
McIlwaine, I.C.: ¬A question of place (2004)
0.01
0.005023338 = product of:
0.035163365 = sum of:
0.02942922 = weight(_text_:representation in 2650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02942922 = score(doc=2650,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11578492 = queryWeight, product of:
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.25417143 = fieldWeight in 2650, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2650)
0.005734144 = product of:
0.017202431 = sum of:
0.017202431 = weight(_text_:29 in 2650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017202431 = score(doc=2650,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08852329 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 2650, 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=2650)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Content
- 1. Introduction The representation of place in classification schemes presents a number of problems. This paper examines some of them and presents different ways in which a solution may be sought. Firstly, what is meant by place? The simple answer is a geographical area, large or small. The reality is not so simple. Place, or Topos to Aristotle was more than just an area, it was a state of mind. But even staying an the less philosophical plane, the way in which a place can be expressed is infinitely variable. Toponymy is a well defined field of study, comparable with taxonomy in the biological sciences. It comprehends the proper name by which any geographical entity is known, and part of the world, feature of earth's surface, organic aggregate (reef, forest) an organizational unit (country, borough, diocese), limits of Earth (poles, hemispheres) parts of Earth (oceans, continents), lakes, mountain passes, capital cities or sea parts.
- Date
- 29. 8.2004 14:17:11
-
Bosch, M.: Ontologies, different reasoning strategies, different logics, different kinds of knowledge representation : working together (2006)
0.00
0.00416192 = product of:
0.058266878 = sum of:
0.058266878 = weight(_text_:representation in 166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.058266878 = score(doc=166,freq=4.0), product of:
0.11578492 = queryWeight, product of:
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.50323373 = fieldWeight in 166, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=166)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Abstract
- The recent experiences in the building, maintenance and reuse of ontologies has shown that the most efficient approach is the collaborative one. However, communication between collaborators such as IT professionals, librarians, web designers and subject matter experts is difficult and time consuming. This is because there are different reasoning strategies, different logics and different kinds of knowledge representation in the applications of Semantic Web. This article intends to be a reference scheme. It uses concise and simple explanations that can be used in common by specialists of different backgrounds working together in an application of Semantic Web.
-
Mai, J.-E.: Classification in context : Relativity, reality, and representation (2004)
0.00
0.0033633395 = product of:
0.04708675 = sum of:
0.04708675 = weight(_text_:representation in 3017) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04708675 = score(doc=3017,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11578492 = queryWeight, product of:
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.40667427 = fieldWeight in 3017, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3017)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
-
Jacob, E.K.: Augmenting human capabilities : classification as cognitive scaffolding (2003)
0.00
0.0029429218 = product of:
0.041200902 = sum of:
0.041200902 = weight(_text_:representation in 2672) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041200902 = score(doc=2672,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11578492 = queryWeight, product of:
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.35583997 = fieldWeight in 2672, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2672)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Source
- Challenges in knowledge representation and organization for the 21st century: Integration of knowledge across boundaries. Proceedings of the 7th ISKO International Conference Granada, Spain, July 10-13, 2002. Ed.: M. López-Huertas
-
Grove, A.: Taxonomy (2009)
0.00
0.0029429218 = product of:
0.041200902 = sum of:
0.041200902 = weight(_text_:representation in 3846) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041200902 = score(doc=3846,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11578492 = queryWeight, product of:
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.35583997 = fieldWeight in 3846, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3846)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Abstract
- Taxonomy reflects the human instinct to organize. Once limited in Western culture to certain natural sciences, in the early twenty-first century, it has expanded to many domains, practices, and uses. Domains now include almost anything of interest, but particularly those motivated by business needs. Practices and uses include description, analysis, prediction, mapping terminology, information access, representation of knowledge, and tool-building. For information science, taxonomy is a powerful tool for connecting information content with information consumers effectively and efficiently.
-
Broughton, V.: Faceted classification as a basis for knowledge organization in a digital environment : the Bliss Bibliographic Classification as a model for vocabulary management and the creation of multidimensional knowledge structures (2003)
0.00
0.0025225044 = product of:
0.03531506 = sum of:
0.03531506 = weight(_text_:representation in 2631) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03531506 = score(doc=2631,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11578492 = queryWeight, product of:
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.3050057 = fieldWeight in 2631, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2631)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Source
- Challenges in knowledge representation and organization for the 21st century: Integration of knowledge across boundaries. Proceedings of the 7th ISKO International Conference Granada, Spain, July 10-13, 2002. Ed.: M. López-Huertas
-
Negrini, G.; Zozi, P.: Ontological analysis of the literary work of art (2003)
0.00
0.0025225044 = product of:
0.03531506 = sum of:
0.03531506 = weight(_text_:representation in 2687) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03531506 = score(doc=2687,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11578492 = queryWeight, product of:
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.3050057 = fieldWeight in 2687, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2687)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Source
- Challenges in knowledge representation and organization for the 21st century: Integration of knowledge across boundaries. Proceedings of the 7th ISKO International Conference Granada, Spain, July 10-13, 2002. Ed.: M. López-Huertas
-
Mai, J.-E.: Is classification theory possible? : Rethinking classification research (2003)
0.00
0.0016816697 = product of:
0.023543375 = sum of:
0.023543375 = weight(_text_:representation in 2759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023543375 = score(doc=2759,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11578492 = queryWeight, product of:
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.20333713 = fieldWeight in 2759, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2759)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Source
- Challenges in knowledge representation and organization for the 21st century: Integration of knowledge across boundaries. Proceedings of the 7th ISKO International Conference Granada, Spain, July 10-13, 2002. Ed.: M. López-Huertas
-
Hjoerland, B.: ¬The methodology of constructing classification schemes : a discussion of the state-of-the-art (2003)
0.00
0.0016816697 = product of:
0.023543375 = sum of:
0.023543375 = weight(_text_:representation in 2760) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023543375 = score(doc=2760,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11578492 = queryWeight, product of:
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.20333713 = fieldWeight in 2760, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2760)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Source
- Challenges in knowledge representation and organization for the 21st century: Integration of knowledge across boundaries. Proceedings of the 7th ISKO International Conference Granada, Spain, July 10-13, 2002. Ed.: M. López-Huertas
-
Olson, H.; Nielsen, J.; Dippie, S.R.: Encyclopaedist rivalry, classificatory commonality, illusory universality (2003)
0.00
0.0016816697 = product of:
0.023543375 = sum of:
0.023543375 = weight(_text_:representation in 2761) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023543375 = score(doc=2761,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11578492 = queryWeight, product of:
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.20333713 = fieldWeight in 2761, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2761)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Source
- Challenges in knowledge representation and organization for the 21st century: Integration of knowledge across boundaries. Proceedings of the 7th ISKO International Conference Granada, Spain, July 10-13, 2002. Ed.: M. López-Huertas
-
McIlwaine, I.C.: Where have all the flowers gone? : An investigation into the fate of some special classification schemes (2003)
0.00
0.0016816697 = product of:
0.023543375 = sum of:
0.023543375 = weight(_text_:representation in 2764) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023543375 = score(doc=2764,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11578492 = queryWeight, product of:
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.20333713 = fieldWeight in 2764, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2764)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Source
- Challenges in knowledge representation and organization for the 21st century: Integration of knowledge across boundaries. Proceedings of the 7th ISKO International Conference Granada, Spain, July 10-13, 2002. Ed.: M. López-Huertas
-
Foskett, A.C.: ¬The future of facetted classification (2000)
0.00
0.0011468288 = product of:
0.016055603 = sum of:
0.016055603 = product of:
0.048166804 = sum of:
0.048166804 = weight(_text_:29 in 3162) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048166804 = score(doc=3162,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08852329 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.5441145 = fieldWeight in 3162, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3162)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Date
- 27. 1.2002 19:30:29
-
Denton, W.: Putting facets on the Web : an annotated bibliography (2003)
0.00
0.0010510436 = product of:
0.01471461 = sum of:
0.01471461 = weight(_text_:representation in 2467) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01471461 = score(doc=2467,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11578492 = queryWeight, product of:
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.12708572 = fieldWeight in 2467, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2467)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Abstract
- This bibliography is not meant to be exhaustive, but unfortunately it is not as complete as I wanted. Some books and articles are not be included, but they may be used in my future work. (These include two books and one article by B.C. Vickery: Faceted Classification Schemes (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers, 1966), Classification and Indexing in Science, 3rd ed. (London: Butterworths, 1975), and "Knowledge Representation: A Brief Review" (Journal of Documentation 42 no. 3 (September 1986): 145-159; and A.C. Foskett's "The Future of Faceted Classification" in The Future of Classification, edited by Rita Marcella and Arthur Maltby (Aldershot, England: Gower, 2000): 69-80). Nevertheless, I hope this bibliography will be useful for those both new to or familiar with faceted hypertext systems. Some very basic resources are listed, as well as some very advanced ones. Some example web sites are mentioned, but there is no detailed technical discussion of any software. The user interface to any web site is extremely important, and this is briefly mentioned in two or three places (for example the discussion of lawforwa.org (see Example Web Sites)). The larger question of how to display information graphically and with hypertext is outside the scope of this bibliography. There are five sections: Recommended, Background, Not Relevant, Example Web Sites, and Mailing Lists. Background material is either introductory, advanced, or of peripheral interest, and can be read after the Recommended resources if the reader wants to know more. The Not Relevant category contains articles that may appear in bibliographies but are not relevant for my purposes.
-
Broughton, V.: Essential classification (2004)
0.00
8.4083487E-4 = product of:
0.011771687 = sum of:
0.011771687 = weight(_text_:representation in 2824) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011771687 = score(doc=2824,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11578492 = queryWeight, product of:
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.10166857 = fieldWeight in 2824, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.600994 = idf(docFreq=1206, maxDocs=44218)
0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2824)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Footnote
- Essential Classification is also an exercise book. Indeed, it contains a number of practical exercises and activities in every chapter, along with suggested answers. Unfortunately, the answers are too often provided without the justifications and explanations that students would no doubt demand. The author has taken great care to explain all technical terms in her text, but formal definitions are also gathered in an extensive 172-term Glossary; appropriately, these terms appear in bold type the first time they are used in the text. A short, very short, annotated bibliography of standard classification textbooks and of manuals for the use of major classification schemes is provided. A detailed 11-page index completes the set of learning aids which will be useful to an audience of students in their effort to grasp the basic concepts of the theory and the practice of document classification in a traditional environment. Essential Classification is a fine textbook. However, this reviewer deplores the fact that it presents only a very "traditional" view of classification, without much reference to newer environments such as the Internet where classification also manifests itself in various forms. In Essential Classification, books are always used as examples, and we have to take the author's word that traditional classification practices and tools can also be applied to other types of documents and elsewhere than in the traditional library. Vanda Broughton writes, for example, that "Subject headings can't be used for physical arrangement" (p. 101), but this is not entirely true. Subject headings can be used for physical arrangement of vertical files, for example, with each folder bearing a simple or complex heading which is then used for internal organization. And if it is true that subject headings cannot be reproduced an the spine of [physical] books (p. 93), the situation is certainly different an the World Wide Web where subject headings as metadata can be most useful in ordering a collection of hot links. The emphasis is also an the traditional paperbased, rather than an the electronic version of classification schemes, with excellent justifications of course. The reality is, however, that supporting organizations (LC, OCLC, etc.) are now providing great quality services online, and that updates are now available only in an electronic format and not anymore on paper. E-based versions of classification schemes could be safely ignored in a theoretical text, but they have to be described and explained in a textbook published in 2005. One last comment: Professor Broughton tends to use the same term, "classification" to represent the process (as in classification is grouping) and the tool (as in constructing a classification, using a classification, etc.). Even in the Glossary where classification is first well-defined as a process, and classification scheme as "a set of classes ...", the definition of classification scheme continues: "the classification consists of a vocabulary (...) and syntax..." (p. 296-297). Such an ambiguous use of the term classification seems unfortunate and unnecessarily confusing in an otherwise very good basic textbook an categorization of concepts and subjects, document organization and subject representation."
-
Lin, W.-Y.C.: ¬The concept and applications of faceted classifications (2006)
0.00
6.494356E-4 = product of:
0.009092098 = sum of:
0.009092098 = product of:
0.027276294 = sum of:
0.027276294 = weight(_text_:22 in 5083) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027276294 = score(doc=5083,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08812423 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.025165197 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5083, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5083)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Date
- 27. 5.2007 22:19:35
