Search (7 results, page 1 of 1)

0.008495579 = product of:
  0.050973468 = sum of:
    0.050973468 = weight(_text_:documentation in 5992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050973468 = score(doc=5992,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1765992 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.354108 = idf(docFreq=1544, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040559217 = queryNorm
        0.28863928 = fieldWeight in 5992, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.354108 = idf(docFreq=1544, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5992)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

The paper examines the development of facet analysis as a methodology and the role it plays in building classifications and other knowledge-organization tools. The use of categorical analysis in areas other than library and information science is also considered. The suitability of the faceted approach for humanities documentation is explored through a critical description of the FATKS (Facet Analytical Theory in Managing Knowledge Structure for Humanities) project carried out at University College London. This research focused on building a conceptual model for the subject of religion together with a relational database and search-and-browse interfaces that would support some degree of automatic classification. The paper concludes with a discussion of the differences between the conceptual model and the vocabulary used to populate it, and how, in the case of religion, the choice of terminology can create an apparent bias in the system.

0.007079649 = product of:
  0.04247789 = sum of:
    0.04247789 = weight(_text_:documentation in 2874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04247789 = score(doc=2874,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1765992 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.354108 = idf(docFreq=1544, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040559217 = queryNorm
        0.24053274 = fieldWeight in 2874, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.354108 = idf(docFreq=1544, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2874)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Purpose - The aim of this article is to estimate the impact of faceted classification and the faceted analytical method on the development of various information retrieval tools over the latter part of the twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. Design/methodology/approach - The article presents an examination of various subject access tools intended for retrieval of both print and digital materials to determine whether they exhibit features of faceted systems. Some attention is paid to use of the faceted approach as a means of structuring information on commercial web sites. The secondary and research literature is also surveyed for commentary on and evaluation of facet analysis as a basis for the building of vocabulary and conceptual tools. Findings - The study finds that faceted systems are now very common, with a major increase in their use over the last 15 years. Most LIS subject indexing tools (classifications, subject heading lists and thesauri) now demonstrate features of facet analysis to a greater or lesser degree. A faceted approach is frequently taken to the presentation of product information on commercial web sites, and there is an independent strand of theory and documentation related to this application. There is some significant research on semi-automatic indexing and retrieval (query expansion and query formulation) using facet analytical techniques. Originality/value - This article provides an overview of an important conceptual approach to information retrieval, and compares different understandings and applications of this methodology.

0.006697695 = product of:
  0.040186167 = sum of:
    0.040186167 = weight(_text_:great in 2824) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.040186167 = score(doc=2824,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22838 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040559217 = queryNorm
        0.17596185 = fieldWeight in 2824, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2824)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

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."

0.0056637186 = product of:
  0.03398231 = sum of:
    0.03398231 = weight(_text_:documentation in 2875) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03398231 = score(doc=2875,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1765992 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.354108 = idf(docFreq=1544, maxDocs=44218)
          0.040559217 = queryNorm
        0.19242619 = fieldWeight in 2875, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.354108 = idf(docFreq=1544, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2875)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Source

Journal of documentation. 63(2007) no.5, S.727-754

0.0054952144 = product of:
  0.032971285 = sum of:
    0.032971285 = product of:
      0.06594257 = sum of:
        0.06594257 = weight(_text_:22 in 6048) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06594257 = score(doc=6048,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14203148 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040559217 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6048, 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=6048)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Date

22. 9.2007 15:41:14

0.0032055415 = product of:
  0.01923325 = sum of:
    0.01923325 = product of:
      0.0384665 = sum of:
        0.0384665 = weight(_text_:22 in 2550) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0384665 = score(doc=2550,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14203148 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040559217 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2550, 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=2550)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Date

9. 2.1997 18:44:22

0.0027476072 = product of:
  0.016485643 = sum of:
    0.016485643 = product of:
      0.032971285 = sum of:
        0.032971285 = weight(_text_:22 in 6392) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032971285 = score(doc=6392,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14203148 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040559217 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 6392, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6392)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Date

10. 8.2001 13:22:14