Dousa, T.M.: Categories and the architectonics of system in Julius Otto Kaiser's method of systematic indexing (2014)
0.02
0.016438173 = product of:
0.041095432 = sum of:
0.026009986 = weight(_text_:study in 1418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026009986 = score(doc=1418,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1448085 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2514048 = idf(docFreq=4653, maxDocs=44218)
0.044537213 = queryNorm
0.17961644 = fieldWeight in 1418, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2514048 = idf(docFreq=4653, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1418)
0.015085445 = product of:
0.03017089 = sum of:
0.03017089 = weight(_text_:22 in 1418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03017089 = score(doc=1418,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15596174 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044537213 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1418, 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=1418)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Categories, or concepts of high generality representing the most basic kinds of entities in the world, have long been understood to be a fundamental element in the construction of knowledge organization systems (KOSs), particularly faceted ones. Commentators on facet analysis have tended to foreground the role of categories in the structuring of controlled vocabularies and the construction of compound index terms, and the implications of this for subject representation and information retrieval. Less attention has been paid to the variety of ways in which categories can shape the overall architectonic framework of a KOS. This case study explores the range of functions that categories took in structuring various aspects of an early analytico-synthetic KOS, Julius Otto Kaiser's method of Systematic Indexing (SI). Within SI, categories not only functioned as mechanisms to partition an index vocabulary into smaller groupings of terms and as elements in the construction of compound index terms but also served as means of defining the units of indexing, or index items, incorporated into an index; determining the organization of card index files and the articulation of the guide card system serving as a navigational aids thereto; and setting structural constraints to the establishment of cross-references between terms. In all these ways, Kaiser's system of categories contributed to the general systematicity of SI.
- Source
- Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik
Dousa, T.M.: Classificatory structure and the evaluation of document classifications : the case of constitutive classification (2014)
0.01
0.013150537 = product of:
0.032876343 = sum of:
0.020807989 = weight(_text_:study in 1424) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020807989 = score(doc=1424,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1448085 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2514048 = idf(docFreq=4653, maxDocs=44218)
0.044537213 = queryNorm
0.14369315 = fieldWeight in 1424, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2514048 = idf(docFreq=4653, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1424)
0.012068355 = product of:
0.02413671 = sum of:
0.02413671 = weight(_text_:22 in 1424) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02413671 = score(doc=1424,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15596174 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044537213 = queryNorm
0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1424, 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=1424)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Some scholars argue that certain classificatory structures possess inherent social-semantic values and that the desirability (or lack thereof) of these values should form a basis for evaluating the classificatory goodness of such structures. Others hold that it is possible to distinguish between the structural properties of a given classificatory structure and the semantic content (and values) of the classification in which it is used, and that the classificatory goodness of a given structural form is best evaluated by its capacity to support effectively the organization of re-sources in a given context. This paper illustrates the second, "functionalist" position by means of a historical case study examining the contrasting evaluations of a single structural form - namely, the flat (a)hierarchical structure known as constitutive classification - by two early pioneers of knowledge organization, Julius Otto Kaiser and James Duff Brown. Both men knew of the use of constitutive classification for the organization of documents and were aware of its affordances, yet formed highly different opinions of it: Kaiser, a special librarian who sought to classify documents by documentary form in business offices and business libraries, endorsed it, whil Brown, a public librarian concerned with subject-based classification of books, rejected it. In both cases, it was the functional capacity (or lack thereof) of constitutive classification to enable an adequate classification of documents with respect to a given semantic content and in a certain context that determined the evaluation of its structural form. This example suggests that structural form is analytically separable from semantic context and social context and that it is its functional alignment with the latter, rather than any supposedly inherent socio-semantic values, that has, in the past, served as a norm for evaluating the goodness of classificatory structures.
- Source
- Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik
