-
Oberhauser, O.: Implementierung und Parametrisierung klassifikatorischer Recherchekomponenten im OPAC (2005)
0.02
0.021902062 = product of:
0.043804124 = sum of:
0.043804124 = sum of:
0.019058352 = weight(_text_:systems in 3353) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019058352 = score(doc=3353,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.118839346 = fieldWeight in 3353, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3353)
0.024745772 = weight(_text_:22 in 3353) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024745772 = score(doc=3353,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 3353, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3353)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Das in den letzten Jahren wiedererwachte Interesse an der klassifikatorischen Erschließung und Recherche hat sich allem Anschein nach noch nicht ausreichend bis zu den Herstellern integrierter Bibliothekssysteme herumgesprochen. Wie wäre es sonst zu erklären, dass im OPAC-Modul eines führenden Systems wie Aleph 500 so gut wie keine Features für klassifikationsbasierte Recherchen zu erblicken sind? Tatsächlich finden wir heute einen im Vergleich zum einstigen System Bibos kaum veränderten Zustand vor: Notationen eines oder mehrerer Klassifikationssysteme können in einer durch MAB dafür bestimmten Kategorie (700, nebst Indikatoren) katalogisiert und dann recherchiert bzw. angezeigt werden. Doch welcher Benutzer weiß schon, was diese Notationen im einzelnen bedeuten? Wer macht sich die Mühe, dies selbst herauszufinden, um dann danach zu recherchieren? Hier liegt im wesentlich dasselbe Problem vor, das schon dem systematischen Zettelkatalog anhaftete und ihn zu einem zwar mühevoll erstellten, aber wenig genutzten Rechercheinstrument machte, das nur dann (zwangsläufig) angenommen wurde, wenn ein verbaler Sachkatalog fehlte. Nun könnte eingewandt werden, dass im Vergleich zu früher unter Aleph 500 wenigstens das Aufblättern von Indizes möglich sei, sodass im OPAC ein Index für die vergebenen Notationen angeboten werden kann (bzw. mehrere solche Indizes bei Verwendung von mehr als nur einem Klassifikationssystem). Gewiss, doch was bringt dem Uneingeweihten das Aufblättern des Notationsindex - außer einer alphabetischen Liste von kryptischen Codes? Weiter könnte man einwenden, dass es im Aleph-500-OPAC die so genannten Suchdienste ("services") gibt, mithilfe derer von bestimmten Elementen einer Vollanzeige hypertextuell weiternavigiert werden kann. Richtig, doch damit kann man bloß wiederum den Index aufblättern oder alle anderen Werke anzeigen lassen, die dieselbe Notationen - also einen Code, dessen Bedeutung meist unbekannt ist - aufweisen. Wie populär mag dieses Feature beim Publikum wohl sein? Ein anderer Einwand wäre der Hinweis auf das inzwischen vom Hersteller angebotene Thesaurus-Modul, das vermutlich auch für Klassifikationssysteme eingesetzt werden könnte. Doch wie viele Bibliotheken unseres Verbundes waren bisher bereit, für dieses Modul, das man eigentlich als Bestandteil des Basissystems erwarten könnte, gesondert zu bezahlen? Schließlich mag man noch einwenden, dass es im Gegensatz zur Bibos-Zeit nun die Möglichkeit gibt, Systematiken und Klassifikationen als Normdateien zu implementieren und diese beim Retrieval für verbale Einstiege in die klassifikatorische Recherche oder zumindest für die Veranschaulichung der Klassenbenennungen in der Vollanzeige zu nutzen. Korrekt - dies ist möglich und wurde sogar einst für die MSC (Mathematics Subject Classification, auch bekannt als "AMS-Klassifikation") versucht. Dieses Projekt, das noch unter der Systemversion 11.5 begonnen wurde, geriet jedoch nach einiger Zeit ins Stocken und fand bedauerlicherweise nie seinen Weg in die folgende Version (14.2). Mag auch zu hoffen sein, dass es unter der neuen Version 16 wieder weitergeführt werden kann, so weist dieses Beispiel doch auf die grundsätzliche Problematik des Normdatei-Ansatzes (zusätzlicher Aufwand, Kontinuität) hin. Zudem lohnt sich die Implementierung einer eigenen Normdatei 4 wohl nur bei einem größeren bzw. komplexen Klassifikationssystem, wogegen man im Falle kleinerer Systematiken kaum daran denken würde.
- Source
- Mitteilungen der Vereinigung Österreichischer Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare. 58(2005) H.1, S.22-37
-
Pollitt, A.S.; Tinker, A.J.; Braekevelt, P.A.J.: Improving access to online information using dynamic faceted classification (1998)
0.01
0.009529176 = product of:
0.019058352 = sum of:
0.019058352 = product of:
0.038116705 = sum of:
0.038116705 = weight(_text_:systems in 4427) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.038116705 = score(doc=4427,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.23767869 = fieldWeight in 4427, 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=4427)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The human natural ability to store and process images and speech provides clues for improving access to online information. The principles underpinning the maps people use in their minds can be applied to maps that can be presented at the user interface to online systems. Traditional classification organizes information into structured hierarchies and simplifies the search problem, but has serious limitations. Discusses the prospects for improving access to online information through the application of dynamic faceted classification. Presents a glimpse into the navigation of n-dimensional information space for future library OPACs using a modified DDC
-
LaBarre, K.: Faceted navigation and browsing features in new OPACs : a more robust solution to problems of information seekers? (2007)
0.01
0.008167865 = product of:
0.01633573 = sum of:
0.01633573 = product of:
0.03267146 = sum of:
0.03267146 = weight(_text_:systems in 688) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03267146 = score(doc=688,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.2037246 = fieldWeight in 688, 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=688)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- At the end of 2005, impending digitization efforts and several developments related to the creation of access and discovery tools for informational and cultural objects resulted in a series of responses that continue to ripple throughout the library, museum and archive communities. These developments have broad implications for all three communities because of the goals shared by each in the creation of description, control and enhanced access to informational and cultural objects. This position paper will consider new implementations of faceted navigation and browsing features in online catalogs. It is also a response to challenges to develop interwoven approaches to the study of information seeking and the design and implementation of search and discovery systems. Urgently needed during this time of experimentation, development and implementation is a framework for system evaluation and critical analysis of needed and missing features that is grounded in traditional principles, borne out by practice. Such a framework could extend feature analysis protocols established during the early years of online catalog development.
-
Gnoli, C.; Pusterla, L.; Bendiscioli, A.; Recinella, C.: Classification for collections mapping and query expansion (2016)
0.01
0.008167865 = product of:
0.01633573 = sum of:
0.01633573 = product of:
0.03267146 = sum of:
0.03267146 = weight(_text_:systems in 3102) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03267146 = score(doc=3102,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.2037246 = fieldWeight in 3102, 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=3102)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Proceedings of the 15th European Networked Knowledge Organization Systems Workshop (NKOS 2016) co-located with the 20th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Digital Libraries 2016 (TPDL 2016), Hannover, Germany, September 9, 2016. Edi. by Philipp Mayr et al. [http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1676/=urn:nbn:de:0074-1676-5]
-
Tinker, A.J.; Pollitt, A.S.; O'Brien, A.; Braekevelt, P.A.: ¬The Dewey Decimal Classification and the transition from physical to electronic knowledge organisation (1999)
0.01
0.007700737 = product of:
0.015401474 = sum of:
0.015401474 = product of:
0.030802948 = sum of:
0.030802948 = weight(_text_:systems in 4468) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030802948 = score(doc=4468,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.19207339 = fieldWeight in 4468, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4468)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The physical organisation of items on library shelves using any classification scheme is inevitable a compromise. The best efforts to achieve an arrangement that is helpful to users will be thwarted by the multifaceted nature of these items and the specific needs of the user and the library. Items on a particular subject will be scattered throughout the library building(s) across disciplines, by physical form, by frequency of use and whether and for how long they may be borrowed. Even thought he rich information content of multifaceted items may be represented in the notation, the items required by a user will be scattered across library shelves when the item is placed in a single relative location. This paper explores these issues uisng examples from a University Library classified using the DDC. The electronic context of the library OPAC can transcend the constraints imposed by the predominantly physical nature of library collections, yet the current use of classification schemes in on-line systems retains many of these limitations. Examples of such systems applying DDC on the WWW are discussed and compared with a system that seeks to use DDC in what is called view-based searching. The interface and the resulting browsing and searching capability of a view-based OPAC are described. Ways in which subject access to library collections can be improved and disciplinary scatter resolved by assigning multiple class number to items and exploiting the rich Dewey structure in a faceted form are discussed. It is suggested that the informative power of visual classificatory structures at the search interface will be beneficial to the broader learning experience of the user. The paper concludes that the application of classification schemes in electronic interfaces should not be bound by the the physical constraints that no longer apply in an electronic context but be exploited to provide a complete, flexible and individual interface as determined by the needs of each user
-
Kniesner, D.L.; Willman, C.: But is it an online shelflist? : classification access in eight OPACs (1995)
0.01
0.0068065543 = product of:
0.013613109 = sum of:
0.013613109 = product of:
0.027226217 = sum of:
0.027226217 = weight(_text_:systems in 5555) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027226217 = score(doc=5555,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.1697705 = fieldWeight in 5555, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5555)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- As librarians increasingly try to use their online catalogues to do what used to be done with their card shelflists, they are realizing that some catalogue sedigners and vendors have not paid enough attention to online shelf order classification access. Compares the call number searching abilities of 8 prominent, mature library systems: VTLS, Inlex, Innovative Interfaces, Inc., Data Research Associates (DRA), Geac Advance, Dynix, SIRSI, and NOTIS. Using 5 criteria that are important to cataloguers, each system was tested and rated for its suitability as an online shelflist. *** Special note from the authors: "[We've] become aware of a new version of SIRSI's Unicorn library system-- version 7.0 that changes our rating of SIRSI in a major way. We had rated SIRSI Unicorn a "C" in the paper, but now we would rate version 7.0 an "A". This is indeed a major change. Fortunately, we identified version numbers for each system in the article: we had tested version 6.1 of SIRSI. Thus, version 7.0 of SIRSI Unicorn, available in early 1995, has improved to the point that it meets every criteria used in the article for suitability as an online shelflist. The authors have evaluated version 7.0 with an "A" rating." ***
