-
Keilty, P.: Tabulating queer : space, perversion, and belonging (2009)
0.04
0.03666427 = product of:
0.07332854 = sum of:
0.028649965 = weight(_text_:science in 3253) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028649965 = score(doc=3253,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12305341 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0467152 = queryNorm
0.23282544 = fieldWeight in 3253, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3253)
0.044678576 = product of:
0.08935715 = sum of:
0.08935715 = weight(_text_:history in 3253) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08935715 = score(doc=3253,freq=2.0), product of:
0.21731828 = queryWeight, product of:
4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
0.0467152 = queryNorm
0.41118103 = fieldWeight in 3253, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3253)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Considering fields as diverse as the history of science, Internet studies, border studies, and coalition politics, the article gives an historical overview of how the knowledge around queer phenomena has been structured, tabulated, and spacialized: the hazards, coercive and productive qualities, as well as queer's paradoxical relationship as both resistant to and reliant on categories, classification, and knowledge structures. In the process, the article also considers the development of Western hierarchical knowledge structures in relation to societal power dynamics, proximity, and space.
-
Lin, W.-Y.C.: ¬The concept and applications of faceted classifications (2006)
0.03
0.034997817 = product of:
0.13999127 = sum of:
0.13999127 = sum of:
0.08935715 = weight(_text_:history in 5083) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08935715 = score(doc=5083,freq=2.0), product of:
0.21731828 = queryWeight, product of:
4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
0.0467152 = queryNorm
0.41118103 = fieldWeight in 5083, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5083)
0.05063412 = weight(_text_:22 in 5083) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05063412 = score(doc=5083,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16358867 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0467152 = 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)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- The concept of faceted classification has its long history and importance in the human civilization. Recently, more and more consumer Web sites adopt the idea of facet analysis to organize and display their products or services. The aim of this article is to review the origin and develpment of faceted classification, as well as its concepts, essence, advantage and limitation. Further, the applications of faceted classification in various domians have been explored.
- Date
- 27. 5.2007 22:19:35
-
Parrochia, D.: Mathematical theory of classification (2018)
0.03
0.02662367 = product of:
0.05324734 = sum of:
0.02532323 = weight(_text_:science in 4308) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02532323 = score(doc=4308,freq=4.0), product of:
0.12305341 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0467152 = queryNorm
0.20579056 = fieldWeight in 4308, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4308)
0.027924111 = product of:
0.055848222 = sum of:
0.055848222 = weight(_text_:history in 4308) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055848222 = score(doc=4308,freq=2.0), product of:
0.21731828 = queryWeight, product of:
4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
0.0467152 = queryNorm
0.25698814 = fieldWeight in 4308, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4308)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- One of the main topics of scientific research, classification is the operation consisting of distributing objects in classes or groups which are, in general, less numerous than them. From Antiquity to the Classical Age, it has a long history where philosophers (Aristotle), and natural scientists (Linnaeus), took a great part. But from the nineteenth century (with the growth of chemistry and information science) and the twentieth century (with the arrival of mathematical models and computer science), mathematics (especially theory of orders and theory of graphs or hypergraphs) allows us to compute all the possible partitions, chains of partitions, covers, hypergraphs or systems of classes we can construct on a domain. In spite of these advances, most of classifications are still based on the evaluation of ressemblances between objects that constitute the empirical data. However, all these classifications remain, for technical and epistemological reasons we detail below, very unstable ones. We lack a real algebra of classifications, which could explain their properties and the relations existing between them. Though the aim of a general theory of classifications is surely a wishful thought, some recent conjecture gives the hope that the existence of a metaclassification (or classification of all classification schemes) is possible
-
Hjoerland, B.: Theories of knowledge organization - theories of knowledge (2017)
0.02
0.023610573 = product of:
0.047221147 = sum of:
0.025068719 = weight(_text_:science in 3494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025068719 = score(doc=3494,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12305341 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0467152 = queryNorm
0.20372227 = fieldWeight in 3494, 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=3494)
0.022152426 = product of:
0.04430485 = sum of:
0.04430485 = weight(_text_:22 in 3494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04430485 = score(doc=3494,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16358867 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0467152 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3494, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3494)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Pages
- S.22-36
- Source
- Theorie, Semantik und Organisation von Wissen: Proceedings der 13. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) und dem 13. Internationalen Symposium der Informationswissenschaft der Higher Education Association for Information Science (HI) Potsdam (19.-20.03.2013): 'Theory, Information and Organization of Knowledge' / Proceedings der 14. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) und Natural Language & Information Systems (NLDB) Passau (16.06.2015): 'Lexical Resources for Knowledge Organization' / Proceedings des Workshops der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) auf der SEMANTICS Leipzig (1.09.2014): 'Knowledge Organization and Semantic Web' / Proceedings des Workshops der Polnischen und Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) Cottbus (29.-30.09.2011): 'Economics of Knowledge Production and Organization'. Hrsg. von W. Babik, H.P. Ohly u. K. Weber
-
Curras, E.: Ranganathan's classification theories under the systems science postulates (1992)
0.02
0.017544448 = product of:
0.07017779 = sum of:
0.07017779 = weight(_text_:science in 6993) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07017779 = score(doc=6993,freq=12.0), product of:
0.12305341 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0467152 = queryNorm
0.57030356 = fieldWeight in 6993, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6993)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Describes the basic ideas concerning system science and discusses S.R. Ranganathan's ideas about concepts of 'universe of ideas', 'universe of science', 'universe of knowledge' and 'universe of classification'. Examines the principles, canons and postulates underlying Colon Classification. Discusses the structure of Colon Classification. Points out that the ideas of Ranganathan conform to the concept 'unity of science' and concludes that the principles of systems science or systems thinking are helpful in understanding the theory of classification formulated by Ranganathan
- Source
- Journal of library and information science. 17(1992) no.1, S.45-65
-
Koshman, S.: Categorization and classification revisited : a review of concept in library science and cognitive psychology (1993)
0.02
0.015507249 = product of:
0.062028997 = sum of:
0.062028997 = weight(_text_:science in 8349) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.062028997 = score(doc=8349,freq=6.0), product of:
0.12305341 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0467152 = queryNorm
0.5040819 = fieldWeight in 8349, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=8349)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Reviews the basic concepts associated with categorization and classification in order to examine the cognitive psychology and library science perspectives toward these processes, to discover if a theoretical affinity exists and to discuss potential applications of cognitive categorization theory to the field of library science
-
Neelameghan, A.: Classification, theory of (1971)
0.01
0.014324983 = product of:
0.05729993 = sum of:
0.05729993 = weight(_text_:science in 1988) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05729993 = score(doc=1988,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12305341 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0467152 = queryNorm
0.4656509 = fieldWeight in 1988, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1988)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Encyclopedia of library and information science. Vol.5
-
Qin, J.: Evolving paradigms of knowledge representation and organization : a comparative study of classification, XML/DTD and ontology (2003)
0.01
0.013491756 = product of:
0.026983513 = sum of:
0.014324983 = weight(_text_:science in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014324983 = score(doc=2763,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12305341 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0467152 = queryNorm
0.11641272 = fieldWeight in 2763, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2763)
0.01265853 = product of:
0.02531706 = sum of:
0.02531706 = weight(_text_:22 in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02531706 = score(doc=2763,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16358867 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0467152 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- 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
-
Wang, Z.; Chaudhry, A.S.; Khoo, C.S.G.: Using classification schemes and thesauri to build an organizational taxonomy for organizing content and aiding navigation (2008)
0.01
0.013491756 = product of:
0.026983513 = sum of:
0.014324983 = weight(_text_:science in 2346) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014324983 = score(doc=2346,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12305341 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0467152 = queryNorm
0.11641272 = fieldWeight in 2346, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2346)
0.01265853 = product of:
0.02531706 = sum of:
0.02531706 = weight(_text_:22 in 2346) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02531706 = score(doc=2346,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16358867 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0467152 = queryNorm
0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2346, 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=2346)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Purpose - Potential and benefits of classification schemes and thesauri in building organizational taxonomies cannot be fully utilized by organizations. Empirical data of building an organizational taxonomy by the top-down approach of using classification schemes and thesauri appear to be lacking. The paper seeks to make a contribution in this regard. Design/methodology/approach - A case study of building an organizational taxonomy was conducted in the information studies domain for the Division of Information Studies at Nanyang Technology University, Singapore. The taxonomy was built by using the Dewey Decimal Classification, the Information Science Taxonomy, two information systems taxonomies, and three thesauri (ASIS&T, LISA, and ERIC). Findings - Classification schemes and thesauri were found to be helpful in creating the structure and categories related to the subject facet of the taxonomy, but organizational community sources had to be consulted and several methods had to be employed. The organizational activities and stakeholders' needs had to be identified to determine the objectives, facets, and the subject coverage of the taxonomy. Main categories were determined by identifying the stakeholders' interests and consulting organizational community sources and domain taxonomies. Category terms were selected from terminologies of classification schemes, domain taxonomies, and thesauri against the stakeholders' interests. Hierarchical structures of the main categories were constructed in line with the stakeholders' perspectives and the navigational role taking advantage of structures/term relationships from classification schemes and thesauri. Categories were determined in line with the concepts and the hierarchical levels. Format of categories were uniformed according to a commonly used standard. The consistency principle was employed to make the taxonomy structure and categories neater. Validation of the draft taxonomy through consultations with the stakeholders further refined the taxonomy. Originality/value - No similar study could be traced in the literature. The steps and methods used in the taxonomy development, and the information studies taxonomy itself, will be helpful for library and information schools and other similar organizations in their effort to develop taxonomies for organizing content and aiding navigation on organizational sites.
- Date
- 7.11.2008 15:22:04
-
McLachlan, H.V.: Buchanan, Locke and Wittgenstein on classification (1981)
0.01
0.0125343595 = product of:
0.050137438 = sum of:
0.050137438 = weight(_text_:science in 1781) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050137438 = score(doc=1781,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12305341 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0467152 = queryNorm
0.40744454 = fieldWeight in 1781, 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=1781)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Journal of information science. 3(1981), S.191-195
-
Malla, N.: Classification of knowledge : a study in the foundations of library science (1991)
0.01
0.0125343595 = product of:
0.050137438 = sum of:
0.050137438 = weight(_text_:science in 3004) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050137438 = score(doc=3004,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12305341 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0467152 = queryNorm
0.40744454 = fieldWeight in 3004, 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=3004)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
-
Gopinath, M.A.: Paradigms, paradigm shifts and classification (1999)
0.01
0.0125343595 = product of:
0.050137438 = sum of:
0.050137438 = weight(_text_:science in 6152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050137438 = score(doc=6152,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12305341 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0467152 = queryNorm
0.40744454 = fieldWeight in 6152, 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=6152)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Library science with a slant to documentation and information studies. 36(1999) no.2, S.73-77
-
Svenonius, E.: Ranganathan and classification science (1992)
0.01
0.0124058 = product of:
0.0496232 = sum of:
0.0496232 = weight(_text_:science in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0496232 = score(doc=2654,freq=6.0), product of:
0.12305341 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0467152 = queryNorm
0.40326554 = fieldWeight in 2654, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2654)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- This article discusses some of Ranganathan's contributions to the productive, practical and theoretical aspects of classification science. These include: (1) a set of design criteria to guide the designing of schemes for knowledge / subject classification; (2) a conceptual framework for organizing the universe of subjects; and (3) an understanding of the general principles underlying subject disciplines and classificatory languages. It concludes that Ranganathan has contributed significantly to laying the foundations for a science of subject classification.
-
Fairthorne, R.A.: Temporal structure in bibliographic classification (1978)
0.01
0.011169644 = product of:
0.044678576 = sum of:
0.044678576 = product of:
0.08935715 = sum of:
0.08935715 = weight(_text_:history in 1650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08935715 = score(doc=1650,freq=2.0), product of:
0.21731828 = queryWeight, product of:
4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
0.0467152 = queryNorm
0.41118103 = fieldWeight in 1650, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1650)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Neither in theory nor in practice does contemporary classification ignore temporal sequence in the sense of history. But it is regarded in a rather static way, as if classification could be reduced to some unique landscape to be viewed by the classifier as from a balloon. ...
-
Gopinath, M.A.; Prasad, K.N.: Compatibility of the principles for design of thesaurus and classification scheme (1976)
0.01
0.010743736 = product of:
0.042974945 = sum of:
0.042974945 = weight(_text_:science in 2943) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042974945 = score(doc=2943,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12305341 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0467152 = queryNorm
0.34923816 = fieldWeight in 2943, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2943)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Library science with a slant to documentation. 13(1976) no.2, S.56-66
-
Garcia Marco, F.J.; Esteban Navarro, M.A.: On some contributions of the cognitive sciences and epistemology to a theory of classification (1995)
0.01
0.0101292925 = product of:
0.04051717 = sum of:
0.04051717 = weight(_text_:science in 5559) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04051717 = score(doc=5559,freq=4.0), product of:
0.12305341 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0467152 = queryNorm
0.3292649 = fieldWeight in 5559, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5559)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Discusses classification as a central resource of human informational activity and as a central aspect of research for many sciences. Argues that thinking about the background of classification can help improve, or at least clarify, the practical tasks of documentary workers and librarians. Discusses the relationship and gaps between cognitive science and information science, and considers the contributions of epistemology and cognitive psychology; in particular, focuses on the role of the latter in the development of an integrative theory of classification
-
Santoro, M.: Ripensare la CDU (1995)
0.01
0.009773439 = product of:
0.039093755 = sum of:
0.039093755 = product of:
0.07818751 = sum of:
0.07818751 = weight(_text_:history in 4940) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07818751 = score(doc=4940,freq=2.0), product of:
0.21731828 = queryWeight, product of:
4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
0.0467152 = queryNorm
0.3597834 = fieldWeight in 4940, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4940)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- A detailed examination of the UDC's history, function and future prospects. Among topics discussed are: the early pioneering work of P. Otlet and H. LaFontaine; the development of Colon Classification; the 'UDC versus switching language' debate in the 1970s; the FID standard reference code project; and the recent scheme by Williamson and McIlwaine to restructure UDC completely, converting it into a Colon Classification and also creating a thesaurus drawn from the same classification. Comments that UDC, far from being a 'prehistoric monster', is becoming a sort of test laboratory for developing new and interesting documentation structures
-
Maniez, J.: ¬Des classifications aux thesaurus : du bon usage des facettes (1999)
0.01
0.009493897 = product of:
0.037975587 = sum of:
0.037975587 = product of:
0.075951174 = sum of:
0.075951174 = weight(_text_:22 in 6404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.075951174 = score(doc=6404,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16358867 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0467152 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6404, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6404)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 1. 8.1996 22:01:00
-
Maniez, J.: ¬Du bon usage des facettes : des classifications aux thésaurus (1999)
0.01
0.009493897 = product of:
0.037975587 = sum of:
0.037975587 = product of:
0.075951174 = sum of:
0.075951174 = weight(_text_:22 in 3773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.075951174 = score(doc=3773,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16358867 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0467152 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3773, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3773)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 1. 8.1996 22:01:00
-
Foskett, D.J.: Systems theory and its relevance to documentary classification (2017)
0.01
0.009493897 = product of:
0.037975587 = sum of:
0.037975587 = product of:
0.075951174 = sum of:
0.075951174 = weight(_text_:22 in 3176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.075951174 = score(doc=3176,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16358867 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0467152 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3176, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3176)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 6. 5.2017 18:46:22
