Search (15385 results, page 770 of 770)

5.548396E-4 = product of:
  0.0022193585 = sum of:
    0.0022193585 = product of:
      0.006658075 = sum of:
        0.006658075 = weight(_text_:science in 1804) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006658075 = score(doc=1804,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043425296 = queryNorm
            0.05820636 = fieldWeight in 1804, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1804)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Summary Taxonomies are often thought to play a niche role within content-oriented knowledge management projects. They are thought to be 'nice to have' but not essential. In this groundbreaking book, Patrick Lambe shows how they play an integral role in helping organizations coordinate and communicate effectively. Through a series of case studies, he demonstrates the range of ways in which taxonomies can help organizations to leverage and articulate their knowledge. A step-by-step guide in the book to running a taxonomy project is full of practical advice for knowledge managers and business owners alike. Key Features Written in a clear, accessible style, demystifying the jargon surrounding taxonomies Case studies give real world examples of taxonomies in use Step-by-step guides take the reader through the key stages in a taxonomy project Decision-making frameworks and example questionnaires Clear description of how taxonomies relate to technology applications The Author Patrick Lambe is a widely respected knowledge management consultant based in Singapore. His Master's degree from University College London is in Information Studies and Librarianship, and he has worked as a professional librarian, as a trainer and instructional designer, and as a business manager in operational and strategic roles. He has been active in the field of knowledge management and e-learning since 1998, and in 2002 founded his own consulting and research firm, Straits Knowledge, with a partner. He is former President of the Information and Knowledge Society, and is Adjunct Professor at Hong Kong Polytechnic University. Patrick speaks and writes internationally on knowledge management. Readership This book is written primarily for knowledge managers and key stakeholders in knowledge management projects. However, it is also useful to all information professionals who wish to understand the role of taxonomies in a corporate setting. It may be used as a teaching text for postgraduate students in Information Studies, Library Science, and Knowledge Management, as well as at MBA level. Contents Part One: Dealing with Babel - the problem of coordination; why taxonomies are important; definitions; taxonomy as a common language; taxonomies express what is important; socially constructed; the business case for taxonomies; taxonomies in KM, collaboration, expertise management and information management; taxonomies, typologies and sensemaking Part Two: Fixing the foundations: planning your taxonomy project - understanding your context; identifying and engaging stakeholders; defining your purpose; planning your approach; communicating and setting expectations; managing myths; how NOT to do a taxonomy project; a taxonomy as a standard; digital information, hierarchies and facets Part Three: Building the floors: implementing your taxonomy project - Implicit taxonomies; evidence gathering; analysis or sensemaking; validation principles and techniques; change management and learning; taxonomy sustainability and governance; taxonomies and technology; measuring success Part Four: Looking skywards: the future of taxonomies - complexity and sensemaking; taxonomies as sensemaking frameworks and patterns; taxonomies and serendipity; taxonomies and ambiguity; anti-taxonomy and folksonomies; taxonomies, ignorance and power; taxonomies and organisational renewal

5.548396E-4 = product of:
  0.0022193585 = sum of:
    0.0022193585 = product of:
      0.006658075 = sum of:
        0.006658075 = weight(_text_:science in 1973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006658075 = score(doc=1973,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043425296 = queryNorm
            0.05820636 = fieldWeight in 1973, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1973)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

... This book is written by library professionals and aimed at the librarians in particular, but it will be useful to others who may be interested in knowing what libraries are up to in the age of Google. It is intended for library science educators and students, library administrators, publishers and university presses. It is well organized, well researched, and easily readable. Article titles are descriptive, allowing the reader to find what he needs by scanning the table of contents or by consulting the index. The only flaw in this book is the lack of summary or conclusions in a few articles. The book is in paperback and has 240 pages. This book is a significant contribution and I highly recommend it."

5.548396E-4 = product of:
  0.0022193585 = sum of:
    0.0022193585 = product of:
      0.006658075 = sum of:
        0.006658075 = weight(_text_:science in 2924) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006658075 = score(doc=2924,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043425296 = queryNorm
            0.05820636 = fieldWeight in 2924, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2924)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Many information professionals working in small units today fail to find the published tools for subject-based organization that are appropriate to their local needs, whether they are archivists, special librarians, information officers, or knowledge or content managers. Large established standards for document description and organization are too unwieldy, unnecessarily detailed, or too expensive to install and maintain. In other cases the available systems are insufficient for a specialist environment, or don't bring things together in a helpful way. A purpose built, in-house system would seem to be the answer, but too often the skills necessary to create one are lacking. This practical text examines the criteria relevant to the selection of a subject-management system, describes the characteristics of some common types of subject tool, and takes the novice step by step through the process of creating a system for a specialist environment. The methodology employed is a standard technique for the building of a thesaurus that incidentally creates a compatible classification or taxonomy, both of which may be used in a variety of ways for document or information management. Key areas covered are: What is a thesaurus? Tools for subject access and retrieval; what a thesaurus is used for? Why use a thesaurus? Examples of thesauri; the structure of a thesaurus; thesaural relationships; practical thesaurus construction; the vocabulary of the thesaurus; building the systematic structure; conversion to alphabetic format; forms of entry in the thesaurus; maintaining the thesaurus; thesaurus software; and; the wider environment. Essential for the practising information professional, this guide is also valuable for students of library and information science.

4.8548466E-4 = product of:
  0.0019419387 = sum of:
    0.0019419387 = product of:
      0.0058258157 = sum of:
        0.0058258157 = weight(_text_:science in 3571) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0058258157 = score(doc=3571,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043425296 = queryNorm
            0.050930567 = fieldWeight in 3571, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.013671875 = fieldNorm(doc=3571)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

"Dear Martin Gardner, Thanks for your interest in my writings. As everyone knows, you're the most highly respected science journalist in the world. I just counted six of your books on my shelf. Yet for interesting, mysterious reasons, you seem unable or unwilling to understand my writing about mathematical existence. Your unhappiness with me is not new. You dissed The Mathematical Experience [1] by me and Phil Davis, in the New York Review of Books. In the most recent issue of The Intelligencer [4], you return to the task. You quote "myths 2, 3 and I from my Eureka article (reprinted in What is Mathematics, Really? [5], pp. 37-39). Myth 3 is somewhat off the point; I will concentrate on 2 and 4. Myth 4 is objectivity. "Mathematical truth or knowledge is the same for everyone. It does not depend on who in particular discovers it; in fact, it is true whether or not anyone discovers it." Your reaction: "What a strange contention" - to call it a myth. Myth 2 is certainty. "Mathematics possesses a method called 'proof' ... by which one attains absolute certainty of the conclusions, given the truth of the premises." Your reaction: "Can Hersh be serious when he calls this a myth'?" In a way, I understand your difficulty. In common speech, when someone says, "That's just a myth!" he means something is false, untrue. But in scholarly writing, "myth" commonly has other meanings. I wrote, on the very next page, "Being a myth doesn't entail its truth or falsity. Myths validate and support institutions; their truth may not be determinable'' About certainty, I wrote: "We're certain 2 + 2 = 4, though we don't all mean the same thing by that equation. It's another matter to claim certainty for the theorems of contemporary mathematics. Many of these theorems have proofs that fill dozens of pages. They're usually built on top of other theorems, whose proofs weren't checked in detail by the mathematician who quotes them. The proofs of these theorems replace boring details with 'it is easily seen' and 'a calculation gives.' Many papers have several coauthors, no one of whom thoroughly checked the whole paper. They may use machine calculations that none of the authors completely understands. A mathematician's confidence in some theorem need not mean she knows every step from the axioms of set theory up to the theorem she's interested in. It may include confidence in fellow researchers, journals, and referees.

4.8548466E-4 = product of:
  0.0019419387 = sum of:
    0.0019419387 = product of:
      0.0058258157 = sum of:
        0.0058258157 = weight(_text_:science in 3727) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0058258157 = score(doc=3727,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043425296 = queryNorm
            0.050930567 = fieldWeight in 3727, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.013671875 = fieldNorm(doc=3727)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

Classification Research Group (CRG) While the CRG was saddened by the loss of Douglas Foskett, a keen mind and stalwart friend, in May 2004, the work an the Bliss Bibliographic Classification (BC2) continues. The group meets an a fairly regular basis an the development of the tables, and meetings often include interesting discussions of the theory of classification in general and as understood in the context of CRG philosophy. At its 339,h meeting in February, discussion focused an the tables for Agriculture and Animal Husbandry, and an Veterinary Science. Among the details discussed were the possibility of parallels between human medicine and veterinary medicine and the acknowledgment of small animal practice. Specializations such as "zoo medicine" and "hedgehog hospitals" were identified. The logical place for "poaching" was discussed and conservation was deemed to go with ecology because of the intervention of humans. Discussions at the 340,h meeting continued with these same topics in more detail, concentrating an the details of the schedules an "livestock, domestic animals, farm animals." Later, the discussion moved an to "forestry, ecology, and environment."