Search (82 results, page 1 of 5)

0.060126036 = product of:
  0.12025207 = sum of:
    0.08233212 = weight(_text_:26 in 909) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08233212 = score(doc=909,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17584132 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04979191 = queryNorm
        0.4682183 = fieldWeight in 909, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=909)
    0.037919957 = product of:
      0.075839914 = sum of:
        0.075839914 = weight(_text_:access in 909) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.075839914 = score(doc=909,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16876608 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04979191 = queryNorm
            0.4493789 = fieldWeight in 909, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=909)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Source

International classification. Pt.1: 16(1989), S.134-140; Pt.2: 17(1990), S.21-26

0.04688233 = product of:
  0.09376466 = sum of:
    0.05945961 = weight(_text_:description in 3541) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05945961 = score(doc=3541,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.23150103 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.64937 = idf(docFreq=1149, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04979191 = queryNorm
        0.25684384 = fieldWeight in 3541, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.64937 = idf(docFreq=1149, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3541)
    0.03430505 = weight(_text_:26 in 3541) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03430505 = score(doc=3541,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17584132 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04979191 = queryNorm
        0.19509095 = fieldWeight in 3541, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3541)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Where the institutionalised study of literature goes, knowledge organisation (KO) approaches to fictional works tend to follow. At the level of generic labelling and categorisation, theoretical conventions of the professional literary critical world appear to be adopted by the information science world, for example in the generic categorisation undertaken by the British National Bibliography. This paper, which is concerned with the epistemological assumptions underpinning fiction categorisation, explores current genre theory and argues for an approach to the understanding of genre, and ultimately the description of genre, that is based on a cultural-materialist, historical world-view. In addition, a novel framework for a genre mapping KO tool is described. Fiction information retrieval is still a fairly underdeveloped area of information science. There have been some developments, mainly in the 1980s and 1990s, which focused on user warrant as the basis for developing retrieval systems (e.g. Pejtersen 1992) but there is still space for a generic approach which can identify and describe novels at a micro-level while situating them within a broader systems view. In the current information retrieval context, any such tool, which would be developed for web use, should incorporate both informational fields and affective dimension indexing in the form of user derived tagging.

Source

Paradigms and conceptual systems in knowledge organization: Proceedings of the Eleventh International ISKO conference, Rome, 23-26 February 2010, ed. Claudio Gnoli, Indeks, Frankfurt M

0.04613351 = product of:
  0.09226702 = sum of:
    0.048027072 = weight(_text_:26 in 5562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.048027072 = score(doc=5562,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17584132 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04979191 = queryNorm
        0.27312735 = fieldWeight in 5562, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5562)
    0.044239953 = product of:
      0.08847991 = sum of:
        0.08847991 = weight(_text_:access in 5562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08847991 = score(doc=5562,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.16876608 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04979191 = queryNorm
            0.5242754 = fieldWeight in 5562, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5562)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

This study examines the recent trend towards the provision of subject access to imaginative literature, particularly fiction. Results of the research include: 1)an enumeration of theoretical problems associated with the provision of multi-dimensional subject access to imaginative literature; 2) an investigation of literary criticism's relevance to the subject analysis of works of imaginative literature; 3)an analysis of the denotative and connotative topical elements constituting works of imaginative literature; and, 4) an evaluation of the non-standard practice of formulating access points from criticism.

Date

5. 8.2006 10:35:26

0.04531968 = product of:
  0.09063936 = sum of:
    0.05488808 = weight(_text_:26 in 7211) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05488808 = score(doc=7211,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17584132 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04979191 = queryNorm
        0.31214553 = fieldWeight in 7211, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7211)
    0.03575128 = product of:
      0.07150256 = sum of:
        0.07150256 = weight(_text_:access in 7211) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07150256 = score(doc=7211,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16876608 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04979191 = queryNorm
            0.4236785 = fieldWeight in 7211, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7211)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

A subcommittee of the Subject Analysis Committee of the Cataloging and Classification Section, Resources and Technical Services Division of the ALA produced recommendations published in 'Guidelines on subject access to individual works of fiction, drama etc.' in 1990. Outlines 4 areas of subject analysis to be applied to fiction: form/genre, character, setting, and topic. Describes the implementation of these guidelines in the US environment and suggests some improvements

Date

5. 8.2006 10:26:19

Footnote

Paper presented at the 10th National Cataloguing Conference on Subject to change: subject access and the role of the cataloguer, Freemantle, Western Australia, 4-6 Nov 93

0.045155756 = product of:
  0.09031151 = sum of:
    0.071351536 = weight(_text_:description in 7728) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.071351536 = score(doc=7728,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.23150103 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.64937 = idf(docFreq=1149, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04979191 = queryNorm
        0.3082126 = fieldWeight in 7728, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.64937 = idf(docFreq=1149, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7728)
    0.018959979 = product of:
      0.037919957 = sum of:
        0.037919957 = weight(_text_:access in 7728) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037919957 = score(doc=7728,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16876608 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04979191 = queryNorm
            0.22468945 = fieldWeight in 7728, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7728)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

This article reports research that used descriptor subfields in MLA Bibliography online to quantify literary warrant in the domain of scholarly work about fiction (i.e., 'fiction studies'). The research used Hulme's concept of literary warrant and Kernan's description of the interactive processes of literature and literary scholarship to justify quantifying existing subject indexing in existing bibliographic records as a first step in the domain analysis of a field. It was found that certain of the MLA Bibliography onle's descriptor subfields and certain of the descriptor terms within those subfields occured more often than would occur by chance. The techniques used in the research might be extended to domain analysis of other fields. Use of the methodology might improve the ability to evaluate existing and to design future subject access systems

0.04380417 = product of:
  0.08760834 = sum of:
    0.04116606 = weight(_text_:26 in 526) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04116606 = score(doc=526,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17584132 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04979191 = queryNorm
        0.23410915 = fieldWeight in 526, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=526)
    0.046442274 = product of:
      0.09288455 = sum of:
        0.09288455 = weight(_text_:access in 526) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09288455 = score(doc=526,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.16876608 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04979191 = queryNorm
            0.5503745 = fieldWeight in 526, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=526)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

This paper examines the need for increased subject catalog access to imaginative literature, focusing on the environment of the academic/research library. New trends in scholarship have created more need for such subject access. We can develop a basis for subject access to imaginative literature by examining the historical treatment of imaginative literature and by drawing upon the past and present work of librarians, other information professionals such as indexers, and literary scholars. While many information professionals have recognized a need for increased subject access to individual works of imagination, there has been no clear consensus on how to do this. This paper represents a step forward in that direction, showing how we might use LCSH to express the themes or topics of an imaginative work. It is important that such subject access be multi-dimensional, identifying both concrete and abstract levels of meaning. Using The Scarlet Letter by Nathaniel Hawthorne as an example, it is demonstrated how LC-type subject headings using LC subject terms with genre/form subdivisions can be developed.

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 14(1991) no.1, S.3-26

0.040084027 = product of:
  0.08016805 = sum of:
    0.05488808 = weight(_text_:26 in 1828) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05488808 = score(doc=1828,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17584132 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04979191 = queryNorm
        0.31214553 = fieldWeight in 1828, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1828)
    0.025279973 = product of:
      0.050559945 = sum of:
        0.050559945 = weight(_text_:access in 1828) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.050559945 = score(doc=1828,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16876608 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04979191 = queryNorm
            0.29958594 = fieldWeight in 1828, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1828)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Date

5. 8.2006 13:00:26

Footnote

Contribution to a special issue devoted to papers read at the 1996 Electronic Access to Fiction research seminar at Copenhagen, Denmark

0.040084027 = product of:
  0.08016805 = sum of:
    0.05488808 = weight(_text_:26 in 5833) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05488808 = score(doc=5833,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17584132 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04979191 = queryNorm
        0.31214553 = fieldWeight in 5833, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5833)
    0.025279973 = product of:
      0.050559945 = sum of:
        0.050559945 = weight(_text_:access in 5833) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.050559945 = score(doc=5833,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16876608 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04979191 = queryNorm
            0.29958594 = fieldWeight in 5833, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5833)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Describes the construction of a thematic catalogue at the Central Public Library in Ghent, Belgium, which was aimed at providing access to the subjects in the fiction collection for the benefit of users at every level of development. No thematic expansion is considered necessary within general categories such as detective stories and science fiction where as thematic expansion is required within specific categories such as travel literature. To some extent, allocation of a theme depends also on the needs of users of the category

Date

5. 8.2006 10:13:26

0.03954301 = product of:
  0.07908602 = sum of:
    0.04116606 = weight(_text_:26 in 3535) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04116606 = score(doc=3535,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17584132 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04979191 = queryNorm
        0.23410915 = fieldWeight in 3535, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3535)
    0.037919957 = product of:
      0.075839914 = sum of:
        0.075839914 = weight(_text_:access in 3535) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.075839914 = score(doc=3535,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.16876608 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04979191 = queryNorm
            0.4493789 = fieldWeight in 3535, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3535)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

This paper provides an introduction to an ongoing research project that aims to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency with which users discover and access folktales. Through systematic and rigorous research combining task analysis with facet analysis, the researchers intend to develop an enhanced bibliographic record prototype. The focus of the paper, however, is to discuss results from the preliminary phase of this project. In particular it will describe the information tasks, information seeking obstacles, and desired features for a discovery and access tool related to folktales for a group of scholarly users of folktales. Additionally the paper will address some of the bibliographic, cultural, and intellectual facets derived from a sample of folktale resources. Finally it proposes a provisional model for enhanced bibliographic records, comparing it with the one implicit in extant bibliographic discovery and access tools.

Source

Paradigms and conceptual systems in knowledge organization: Proceedings of the Eleventh International ISKO conference, Rome, 23-26 February 2010, ed. Claudio Gnoli, Indeks, Frankfurt M

0.036536586 = product of:
  0.14614634 = sum of:
    0.14614634 = sum of:
      0.098923534 = weight(_text_:access in 5843) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.098923534 = score(doc=5843,freq=10.0), product of:
          0.16876608 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04979191 = queryNorm
          0.5861577 = fieldWeight in 5843, product of:
            3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
              10.0 = termFreq=10.0
            3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5843)
      0.04722281 = weight(_text_:22 in 5843) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04722281 = score(doc=5843,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17436278 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04979191 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5843, 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=5843)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Considers the recent trend towards the promotion, by public libraries, of literary fiction with particular reference to a new fiction initiative by the British Library which seeks to redress the imbalance between the level of access provided for fiction and non fiction in library catalogues. From January 1997, the BNB catalogue records for works of fiction will be indexed using the LCSH in conjunction with a range of genre and form headings derived from the American Library Association' Guidelines on Subject Access to Individual Works on Fiction, Drama etc. (GSAFD). Access provided by the GSAFD approach encompass access by genre and access by subject

Source

Librarians world. 6(1997) no.2, S.22-24

0.02943101 = product of:
  0.11772404 = sum of:
    0.11772404 = weight(_text_:description in 1964) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11772404 = score(doc=1964,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.23150103 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.64937 = idf(docFreq=1149, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04979191 = queryNorm
        0.5085249 = fieldWeight in 1964, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.64937 = idf(docFreq=1149, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1964)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Kirjasampo.fi is a Web service for fiction. It was constructed after rethinking all the phases of metadata production, and is the first Finnish information system for libraries to be built with the tools of the Semantic Web. Kirjasampo is based on a metadata schema for fiction that uses a Resource Description Framework (RDF) data model. A user-friendly annotation editor enables library professionals to save, accumulate, and distribute literary knowledge and tacit information. The goal of Kirjasampo is to describe the contents of literary works based on the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records. Content description is done using ontologies, which enable a flexible linking of metadata.

0.029108802 = product of:
  0.11643521 = sum of:
    0.11643521 = weight(_text_:26 in 1009) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11643521 = score(doc=1009,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.17584132 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04979191 = queryNorm
        0.6621607 = fieldWeight in 1009, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1009)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Bibliotheksdienst. 26(1992), S.950

0.02744404 = product of:
  0.10977616 = sum of:
    0.10977616 = weight(_text_:26 in 3952) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10977616 = score(doc=3952,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17584132 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04979191 = queryNorm
        0.62429106 = fieldWeight in 3952, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=3952)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Bücherei. 5(1938), S.26-33

0.023783846 = product of:
  0.09513538 = sum of:
    0.09513538 = weight(_text_:description in 3727) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09513538 = score(doc=3727,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.23150103 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.64937 = idf(docFreq=1149, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04979191 = queryNorm
        0.41095015 = fieldWeight in 3727, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.64937 = idf(docFreq=1149, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3727)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Aims to provide an accurate and comprehensive bibliographic description of Canadian science fiction and fantasy literature in english language pulp magazines published between 1896 and 1955, a fragile and increasingly elusive periodical genre which contains a virtually unknown selection of popular fiction and art by Canadians. The arrangement is alphabetical under the following headings: author index; title index; artist index; magazine index; and series index

0.021022148 = product of:
  0.08408859 = sum of:
    0.08408859 = weight(_text_:description in 4548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08408859 = score(doc=4548,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.23150103 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.64937 = idf(docFreq=1149, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04979191 = queryNorm
        0.36323205 = fieldWeight in 4548, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.64937 = idf(docFreq=1149, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4548)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Purpose - The subject description of novels in library catalogues is traditionally limited to the classification number with no description of the story. On the other hand, enthusiastic readers describe novels by tags or reviews in Web services. The purpose of this paper is to analyse readers' descriptions of novels and suggest an enhancement of the catalogue record which would be useful to the readers. Design/methodology/approach - The original research involved a content analysis of tags and reviews written by users in the online bookstore Amazon.com, the online reader advisory service LibraryThing, and the reading promotion project Primorci beremo. The results were compared to previously published results. Findings - The characteristics that most frequently elicit comments by readers are: the names of the creators and literary characters, geographic names and the titles of works, the time frame in which the story takes place, and the literary genre. Their evaluation of a novel was expressed with an opinion, an analysis, or a professional review. Awards were mentioned, and readers often also expressed their personal experience with the novel. They connected the novel with a sequel or series, with otherwise related novels, movies, etc. Often, pictures of the cover and other factual data were included. Research limitations/implications - Research was limited to readers' experiences and descriptions of literary works written in prose. Practical implications - It is suggested that the time frame, genre and awards received should be included in the functional requirements models. Originality/value - Original research was conducted over a longer period of time. The results were re-evaluated and compared to previously published results from studies by different researchers.

0.020810865 = product of:
  0.08324346 = sum of:
    0.08324346 = weight(_text_:description in 6090) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08324346 = score(doc=6090,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.23150103 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.64937 = idf(docFreq=1149, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04979191 = queryNorm
        0.35958138 = fieldWeight in 6090, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.64937 = idf(docFreq=1149, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6090)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This paper examines the content description of fictional works, specifically novels. The data for the empirical part of the study was gathered in Finnish public libraries. The aim of the study is to find out how library clients and library professionals of public libraries describe novels by abstracting them - what are differences in their characterisations and what are the similarities between their abstracts. Also, a taxonomy of novel abstracts is given. The abstracts are classified into four categories in the taxonomy: plot or thematic abstracts, cultural-historical abstracts, subjective or personal abstracts and critical abstracts. In the final portion of the paper, a model for a search and retrieval system for fiction is presented.

0.020810865 = product of:
  0.08324346 = sum of:
    0.08324346 = weight(_text_:description in 4550) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08324346 = score(doc=4550,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.23150103 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.64937 = idf(docFreq=1149, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04979191 = queryNorm
        0.35958138 = fieldWeight in 4550, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          4.64937 = idf(docFreq=1149, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4550)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Purpose - Library Director Jarmo Saarti introduced a wide or ideal model for fiction in literature in his dissertation, published in 1999. It introduces those aspects that should be included in an information system for fiction. Such aspects include literary prose and its intertextual references to other works, the writer, readers' and critics' receptions of the work as well as a researcher's view. It is also important to note how libraries approach a literary work by means of inventory, classification and content description. The most ambiguous of the aspects relates to that context in cultural history, which the work reflects and is a part of. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach - Since the model consists of several components which are not found in present library information systems and cannot be implemented by them, a new way had to be found to produce, save, process and present fiction-related metadata. The Semantic Computing Research Group of Aalto University has developed several Semantic Web services for use in the field of culture, so cooperation with it and the use of Semantic Web tools were a natural starting point for the construction of the new service. Kirjasampo will be based on the Semantic Web RDF data model. The model enables a flexible linking of metadata derived from different sources, and it can be used to build a Semantic Web that can be approached contextually from different angles. Findings - The "semantically enriched" ideal model for fiction has hence been realised, at least to some extent: Kirjasampo supports literature-related metadata that is more varied than earlier and aims to account for different contexts within literature and connections with regard to other cultural phenomena. It also includes contemporary reviews of works and, as such, readers' receptions as well. Modern readers can share their views on works, once the user interface of the server is completed. It will include several features from the Kirjasto 2.0-application, which enables the evaluation, description and recommendations of works. The service should be online by the end of Spring 2011. Research limitations/implications - The project involves novel collaboration between a public library and a computer science research unit, and utilises a novel approach to the description of fiction. Practical implications - The system encourages user participation in the description of fiction and is of practical benefit to librarians in understanding both how fiction is organised and how users interpret the same. Originality/value - Upon completion, the service will be the first Finnish information system for libraries built with the tools of the Semantic Web which offers a completely new user environment and application for data produced by libraries. It also strives to create a new model for saving and producing data, available to both library professionals and readers. The aim is to save, accumulate and distribute literary knowledge, experiences and silent information.

0.020810865 = product of:
  0.08324346 = sum of:
    0.08324346 = weight(_text_:description in 1952) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08324346 = score(doc=1952,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.23150103 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.64937 = idf(docFreq=1149, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04979191 = queryNorm
        0.35958138 = fieldWeight in 1952, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.64937 = idf(docFreq=1149, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1952)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Publishers present novels with summaries, librarians provide subject headings, classification numbers and annotations, literary theorists write reviews. Readers share opinions and tags in social networks. These groups share interest in the same novel and possibly in the same library catalogs. I analyze the descriptions of novels written by these four groups to propose the enhancement of library catalogs. Results show that the story, information about the author, genre, personal experience with reading the novel, and an evaluation (awards, personal evaluation) are consistently presented by all four groups and should become standard elements for the subject description of fiction.

0.02058303 = product of:
  0.08233212 = sum of:
    0.08233212 = weight(_text_:26 in 142) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08233212 = score(doc=142,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17584132 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04979191 = queryNorm
        0.4682183 = fieldWeight in 142, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=142)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

5. 8.2006 13:27:26

0.02058303 = product of:
  0.08233212 = sum of:
    0.08233212 = weight(_text_:26 in 4753) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08233212 = score(doc=4753,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17584132 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04979191 = queryNorm
        0.4682183 = fieldWeight in 4753, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5315237 = idf(docFreq=3516, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4753)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

10. 3.1997 19:56:26