Search (17 results, page 1 of 1)

0.038114388 = product of:
  0.09528597 = sum of:
    0.038640905 = weight(_text_:it in 2289) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.038640905 = score(doc=2289,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.25564227 = fieldWeight in 2289, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2289)
    0.05664506 = weight(_text_:22 in 2289) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05664506 = score(doc=2289,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18300882 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2289, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2289)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

This paper looks at current trends in knowledge organization research, concentrating an universal systems, mapping vocabularies and interoperability concerns, problems of blas, the Internet and search engines, resource discovery, thesauri and visual presentation. Some Problems facing researchers at the present time are discussed. It is accompanied by a bibliography of recent work in the field.

Date

10. 6.2004 19:22:56

0.019825771 = product of:
  0.09912886 = sum of:
    0.09912886 = weight(_text_:22 in 1012) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09912886 = score(doc=1012,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18300882 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 1012, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1012)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

Extensions and corrections to the UDC. 22(2000), S.49-75

0.011712402 = product of:
  0.05856201 = sum of:
    0.05856201 = weight(_text_:it in 7738) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05856201 = score(doc=7738,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.38743722 = fieldWeight in 7738, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7738)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

An exploratory and experimental study for the purpose of testing a methodology which might be used to restructure the UDC class by class. The study uses the facet framework established in the Bliss Bibliographic Classification, 2nd ed., as the basis for the restructuring and the research is being carried out using the discipline 'medical sciences'. A thesaurus will be derived from the restructured scheme which will act as an index to it. In a broader context this research is an attempt to see how far it is possible to take the knowledge base of one classification scheme and impose the structure of another scheme on it

0.010929298 = product of:
  0.05464649 = sum of:
    0.05464649 = weight(_text_:it in 7934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05464649 = score(doc=7934,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.36153275 = fieldWeight in 7934, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7934)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

UDC is used by a number of national bibliographies but it can not be described as a standard. Explores reasons which hinders its use. Gives reason why it has not achieved international status discussing the application of the classification and its management. Decribes recent efforts to improve the situation

0.009912886 = product of:
  0.04956443 = sum of:
    0.04956443 = weight(_text_:22 in 1899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04956443 = score(doc=1899,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18300882 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1899, 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=1899)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

Knowledge organization. 22(1995) no.2, S.64-69

0.0086403685 = product of:
  0.04320184 = sum of:
    0.04320184 = weight(_text_:it in 6089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04320184 = score(doc=6089,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.28581673 = fieldWeight in 6089, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=6089)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

The genesis of the Group: In 1948, as part of the post-war renewal of library services in the United Kingdom, the Royal Society organized a Conference on Scientific Information.' What, at the time, must have seemed a minute part of the grand plan, but was later to have a transforming effect on the theory of knowledge organization throughout the remainder of the century, was the setting up of a standing committee of a small group of specialists to investigate the organization and retrieval of scientific information. In 1950, the secretary of that committee, J.D. Bernal, suggested that it might be appropriate to ask a group of librarians to do a study of the problem. After a couple of years of informal discussion it was agreed, in February 1952, to form a Classification Research Group - the CRG as it has become known to subsequent generations. The Group published a brief corporate statement of its views in the Library Association Record in June 1953 and submitted a memorandum to the Library Association Research Committee in May 1955, entitled "The need for a faceted classification as the basis of all methods of information retrieval". This memorandum was published in the proceedings of what has become known as the "Dorking Conference" in 1957. Of the original fifteen members, four still belong to the Group, three of whom are in regular attendance: Eric Coates, Douglas Foskett and Jack Mills. Brian Vickery ceased attending regularly in the 1960s but has retained his interest in their doings: he was present at the 150th celebratory meeting in 1984 and played an active part in the "Dorking revisited" conference held in 1997. The stated aim of the Group was 'To review the basic principles of bibliographic classification, unhampered by allegiance to any particular published scheme' and it can truly be stated that the work of its members has had a fundamental influence on the teaching and practice of information retrieval. It is paradoxical that this collection of people has exerted such a strong theoretical sway because their aims were from the outset and remain essentially practical. This fact is sometimes overlooked in the literature on knowledge organization: there is a tendency to get carried away, and for researchers of today to concentrate so hard on what might be that they overlook what is needed, useful and practical - the entire objective of any retrieval system.

0.008366001 = product of:
  0.041830003 = sum of:
    0.041830003 = weight(_text_:it in 161) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041830003 = score(doc=161,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.27674085 = fieldWeight in 161, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=161)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

This book is an extension and total revision of the author's earlier Guide to the use of UDC. The original was written in 1993 and in the intervening years much has happened with the classification. In particular, a much more rigorous approach has been undertaken in revision to ensure that the scheme is able to handle the requirements of a networked world. The book outlines the history and development of the Universal Decimal Classification, provides practical hints on its application and works through all the auxiliary and main tables highlighting aspects that need to be noted in applying the scheme. It also provides guidance on the use of the Master Reference File and discusses the ways in which the classification is used in the 21st century and its suitability as an aid to subject description in tagging metadata and consequently for application on the Internet. It is intended as a source for information about the scheme, for practical usage by classifiers in their daily work and as a guide to the student learning how to apply the classification. It is amply provided with examples to illustrate the many ways in which the scheme can be applied and will be a useful source for a wide range of information workers

0.008366001 = product of:
  0.041830003 = sum of:
    0.041830003 = weight(_text_:it in 2650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041830003 = score(doc=2650,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.27674085 = fieldWeight in 2650, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2650)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

This paper looks at the problems raised by maintaining an Area Table in a general scheme of classification. It examines the tools available to assist in producing a standardized listing and demonstrates how recent developments in the Universal Decimal Classification enable users to have a retrieval tool suitable for use in a networked environment which acts as both a gazetteer and a classification.

Content

1. Introduction The representation of place in classification schemes presents a number of problems. This paper examines some of them and presents different ways in which a solution may be sought. Firstly, what is meant by place? The simple answer is a geographical area, large or small. The reality is not so simple. Place, or Topos to Aristotle was more than just an area, it was a state of mind. But even staying an the less philosophical plane, the way in which a place can be expressed is infinitely variable. Toponymy is a well defined field of study, comparable with taxonomy in the biological sciences. It comprehends the proper name by which any geographical entity is known, and part of the world, feature of earth's surface, organic aggregate (reef, forest) an organizational unit (country, borough, diocese), limits of Earth (poles, hemispheres) parts of Earth (oceans, continents), lakes, mountain passes, capital cities or sea parts.

0.008196974 = product of:
  0.04098487 = sum of:
    0.04098487 = weight(_text_:it in 124) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04098487 = score(doc=124,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.27114958 = fieldWeight in 124, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=124)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Cross-fertilization between disciplines is held to be a new phenomenon. This is not really the case, but what is new is the availability of vast quantities of information that crosses disciplinary boundaries and is unorganized on the WWW. Browsability is no longer an option in the same way it has been in the past and new methods have to be devised for accessing information. Rather than abandoning the tried and tested, it is suggested that a more practical approach might be to redesign existing tools, i.e. bibliographic classifications for this purpose. Two interdisciplinary fields of study, Tourism and Environmental Science, have recently been revised in the Universal Decimal Classification, in an attempt to make the scheme more appropriate for the needs of the twenty-first century.

0.0077281813 = product of:
  0.038640905 = sum of:
    0.038640905 = weight(_text_:it in 3120) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.038640905 = score(doc=3120,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.25564227 = fieldWeight in 3120, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3120)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

4 different items, all of which have direct concern for Africa, have been published between 1991 and 1993 under the auspices of the UDC Consortium, the body now responsible for the maintenance of the UDC. Discusses recent changes in the management structure of UDC. Matters of interest to those concerned with the study of Africa will be found principally in the auxiliary tables, since it is here that most of the detail that is used for specification in the main classes is located. Looks at 2 sections of the classification: tables of language and ethnis subdivisions; and the area table

0.0077281813 = product of:
  0.038640905 = sum of:
    0.038640905 = weight(_text_:it in 2635) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.038640905 = score(doc=2635,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.25564227 = fieldWeight in 2635, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2635)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Reports the completion of the computerized Master Reference File of the UDC and shows how it was compiled. Examines editions used a sources, especially the International Medium Edition in English and French, outlines the new sections of physical chemistry and languages and indicates plans for the future development of the scheme on a more rigorously faceted basis. The recent French and Spanish editions are discussed

0.0070806327 = product of:
  0.035403162 = sum of:
    0.035403162 = weight(_text_:22 in 3692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.035403162 = score(doc=3692,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18300882 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3692, 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=3692)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 7.2010 19:32:06

0.006762158 = product of:
  0.03381079 = sum of:
    0.03381079 = weight(_text_:it in 3773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03381079 = score(doc=3773,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.22368698 = fieldWeight in 3773, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3773)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

This entry outlines the history, application, and nature of the Universal Decimal Classification (UDC). It explains its structure, management, revision, and the many changes that have taken place since the Task Force for UDC Development reported in 1990, and the UDC Consortium was formed. This led to the creation of the machine-readable database, or Master Reference File (MRF), consisting of some 66,000 terms, which forms the basis of all published editions and is revised and updated annually. Revision procedures and applications in an online environment are noted and the potential for future development discussed.

0.0066928007 = product of:
  0.033464003 = sum of:
    0.033464003 = weight(_text_:it in 2764) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033464003 = score(doc=2764,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.22139269 = fieldWeight in 2764, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2764)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Prior to the OPAC many institutions devised classifications to suit their special needs. Others expanded or altered general schemes to accommodate specific approaches. A driving force in the creation of these classifications was the Classification Research Group, celebrating its golden jubilee in 2002, whose work created a framework and body of principles that remain valid for the retrieval needs of today. The paper highlights some of these special schemes and highlights the fundamental principles which remain valid. 1. Introduction The distinction between a general and a special classification scheme is made frequently in the textbooks, but is one that it is sometimes difficult to draw. The Library of Congress classification could be described as the special classification par excellence. Normally, however, a special classification is taken to be one that is restricted to a specific subject, and quite often used in one specific context only, either a library or a bibliographic listing or for a specific purpose such as a search engine and it is in this sense that I propose to examine some of these schemes. Today, there is a widespread preference for searching an words as a supplement to the use of a standard system, usually the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC). This is enhanced by the ability to search documents full-text in a computerized environment, a situation that did not exist 20 or 30 years ago. Today's situation is a great improvement in many ways, but it does depend upon the words used by the author and the searcher corresponding, and often presupposes the use of English. In libraries, the use of co-operative services and precatalogued records already provided with classification data has also spelt the demise of the special scheme. In many instances, the survival of a special classification depends upon its creaior and, with the passage of time, this becomes inevitably more precarious.

0.004830113 = product of:
  0.024150565 = sum of:
    0.024150565 = weight(_text_:it in 141) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024150565 = score(doc=141,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.15977642 = fieldWeight in 141, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=141)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Outlines the bibliographic enterprise envisaged by Otlet and LaFontaine, which resulted in the UDC being developed in 1895, and the subsequent history of the scheme. Relationship with DDC from which it was derived deteriorated in the early 20th century and changes in funding, location, and editorship of Duyvis from 1929-59 had a profound effect on the scheme's development and management. Lloyd, Duyvis successor, reformed the revision structure, and further management changes from 1975 to the present day, culminated in the formation of the UDC Consortium in 1992. Notes the subsequent creation of a machine-readable Master Reference File and speedier revision procedures. Examines the scheme's structure, development, and influence on classification theory, problems caused by longevity and lack of standrad procedures, and highlights proposals for their reform to improve the scheme's suitability for an automated world. Explores research projects in 1960s which foreshadowed possibilities today, such as a complementary thesaurus and individualisation of single concepts notationally. Emphasizes the value of classification in a multilingual environment and outlines the future developments

0.004830113 = product of:
  0.024150565 = sum of:
    0.024150565 = weight(_text_:it in 3814) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024150565 = score(doc=3814,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.15977642 = fieldWeight in 3814, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3814)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

The paper examines the potentiality of the Universal Decimal Classification as a means for retrieving subjects from the World Wide Web. The analytico-synthetic basis of the scheme provides the facility to link concepts at the input or search stage and to isolate concepts via the notation so as to retrieve the separate parts of a compound subject individually if required. Its notation permits hierarchical searching and overrides the shortcomings of natural language. Recent revisions have been constructed with this purpose in mind, the most recent being for Management. The use of the classification embedded in metadata, as in the GERHARD system or as a basis for subject trees is discussed. Its application as a gazetteer is another Web application to which it is put. The range of up to date editions in many languages and the availability of a Web-based version make its use as a switching language increasingly valuable.

0.0038640907 = product of:
  0.019320453 = sum of:
    0.019320453 = weight(_text_:it in 2130) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019320453 = score(doc=2130,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052260913 = queryNorm
        0.12782113 = fieldWeight in 2130, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2130)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

The aim of this special issue of Knowledge Organization is to explore the definition of the interdisciplinary field of "knowledge organization" through historical and contemporary perspectives. The goal is to provide a shared framework of terminology, theories, methodologies, and approaches to stimulate research. The International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO) is the premier international scholarly society devoted to the theory and practice of knowledge organization. At the Ninth International ISKO Conference in Vienna in July 2006, it became clear during informal conversations and discussions within the Scientific Advisory Council that there was a need to present a shared definition of the field of knowledge organization. While a majority of ISKO members are drawn from the field of library and information science (LIS), interest in knowledge organization is not limited to the LIS field. Indeed, contributors to Knowledge Organization (the society's journal) and to ISKO conferences represent areas of interdisciplinary research and application well beyond LIS itself. The excitement engendered by wide interest from many disciplines in the field of knowledge organization has also caused some confusion about the meaning of "knowledge organization" and its relationship to other fields such as "knowledge management." We have invited a group of authors drawn widely from the ISKO community and who among them span a half century of research in the field to address such questions as: