Search (136 results, page 1 of 7)

0.09188389 = product of:
  0.13782583 = sum of:
    0.12215694 = weight(_text_:digital in 2164) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12215694 = score(doc=2164,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.20228553 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051282257 = queryNorm
        0.60388374 = fieldWeight in 2164, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2164)
    0.015668897 = product of:
      0.031337794 = sum of:
        0.031337794 = weight(_text_:library in 2164) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031337794 = score(doc=2164,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13484047 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051282257 = queryNorm
            0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 2164, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2164)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The paper discusses practical methods of apply DDC to digital library services arising from recent technical developments. These include the use of DDC summaries to create hierarchical browsing and tag cloud interfaces, the utility of DDC as a switching language between different subject heading and classification schemes, and the development of terminology servers for interoperability with digital libraries. The focus is on services based in Europe.

0.086196244 = product of:
  0.12929437 = sum of:
    0.10579102 = weight(_text_:digital in 3438) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10579102 = score(doc=3438,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20228553 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051282257 = queryNorm
        0.52297866 = fieldWeight in 3438, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3438)
    0.023503343 = product of:
      0.047006685 = sum of:
        0.047006685 = weight(_text_:library in 3438) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047006685 = score(doc=3438,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13484047 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051282257 = queryNorm
            0.34860963 = fieldWeight in 3438, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3438)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

0.07852829 = product of:
  0.117792435 = sum of:
    0.086378 = weight(_text_:digital in 2047) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.086378 = score(doc=2047,freq=48.0), product of:
        0.20228553 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051282257 = queryNorm
        0.42701027 = fieldWeight in 2047, product of:
          6.928203 = tf(freq=48.0), with freq of:
            48.0 = termFreq=48.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2047)
    0.031414434 = sum of:
      0.017518358 = weight(_text_:library in 2047) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.017518358 = score(doc=2047,freq=10.0), product of:
          0.13484047 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051282257 = queryNorm
          0.12991914 = fieldWeight in 2047, product of:
            3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
              10.0 = termFreq=10.0
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2047)
      0.013896076 = weight(_text_:22 in 2047) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.013896076 = score(doc=2047,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17958173 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051282257 = queryNorm
          0.07738023 = fieldWeight in 2047, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2047)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Date

2. 1.2004 10:35:22

Footnote

Rez. in: Knowledge organization 30(2003) no.1, S.40-42 (J.-E. Mai): "Introduction: This is a collection of papers presented at the National Seminar an Classification in the Digital Environment held in Bangalore, India, an August 9-11 2001. The collection contains 18 papers dealing with various issues related to knowledge organization and classification theory. The issue of transferring the knowledge, traditions, and theories of bibliographic classification to the digital environment is an important one, and I was excited to learn that proceedings from this seminar were available. Many of us experience frustration an a daily basis due to poorly constructed Web search mechanisms and Web directories. As a community devoted to making information easily accessible we have something to offer the Web community and a seminar an the topic was indeed much needed. Below are brief summaries of the 18 papers presented at the seminar. The order of the summaries follows the order of the papers in the proceedings. The titles of the paper are given in parentheses after the author's name. AHUJA and WESLEY (From "Subject" to "Need": Shift in Approach to Classifying Information an the Internet/Web) argue that traditional bibliographic classification systems fall in the digital environment. One problem is that bibliographic classification systems have been developed to organize library books an shelves and as such are unidimensional and tied to the paper-based environment. Another problem is that they are "subject" oriented in the sense that they assume a relatively stable universe of knowledge containing basic and fixed compartments of knowledge that can be identified and represented. Ahuja and Wesley suggest that classification in the digital environment should be need-oriented instead of subjectoriented ("One important link that binds knowledge and human being is his societal need. ... Hence, it will be ideal to organise knowledge based upon need instead of subject." (p. 10)).
AHUJA and SATIJA (Relevance of Ranganathan's Classification Theory in the Age of Digital Libraries) note that traditional bibliographic classification systems have been applied in the digital environment with only limited success. They find that the "inherent flexibility of electronic manipulation of documents or their surrogates should allow a more organic approach to allocation of new subjects and appropriate linkages between subject hierarchies." (p. 18). Ahija and Satija also suggest that it is necessary to shift from a "subject" focus to a "need" focus when applying classification theory in the digital environment. They find Ranganathan's framework applicable in the digital environment. Although Ranganathan's focus is "subject oriented and hence emphasise the hierarchical and linear relationships" (p. 26), his framework "can be successfully adopted with certain modifications ... in the digital environment." (p. 26). SHAH and KUMAR (Model for System Unification of Geographical Schedules (Space Isolates)) report an a plan to develop a single schedule for geographical Subdivision that could be used across all classification systems. The authors argue that this is needed in order to facilitate interoperability in the digital environment. SAN SEGUNDO MANUEL (The Representation of Knowledge as a Symbolization of Productive Electronic Information) distills different approaches and definitions of the term "representation" as it relates to representation of knowledge in the library and information science literature and field. SHARADA (Linguistic and Document Classification: Paradigmatic Merger Possibilities) suggests the development of a universal indexing language. The foundation for the universal indexing language is Chomsky's Minimalist Program and Ranganathan's analytico-synthetic classification theory; Acording to the author, based an these approaches, it "should not be a problem" (p. 62) to develop a universal indexing language.
SELVI (Knowledge Classification of Digital Information Materials with Special Reference to Clustering Technique) finds that it is essential to classify digital material since the amount of material that is becoming available is growing. Selvi suggests using automated classification to "group together those digital information materials or documents that are "most similar" (p. 65). This can be attained by using Cluster analysis methods. PRADHAN and THULASI (A Study of the Use of Classification and Indexing Systems by Web Resource Directories) compare and contrast the classificatory structures of Google, Yahoo, and Looksmart's directories and compare the directories to Dewey Decimal Classification, Library of Congress Classification and Colon Classification's classificatory structures. They find differentes between the directories' and the bibliographic classification systems' classificatory structures and principles. These differentes stem from the fact that bibliographic classification systems are used to "classify academic resources for the research community" (p. 83) and directories "aim to categorize a wider breath of information groups, entertainment, recreation, govt. information, commercial information" (p. 83). NEELAMEGHAN (Hierarchy, Hierarchical Relation and Hierarchical Arrangement) reviews the concept of hierarchy and the formation of hierarchical structures across a variety of domains. NEELAMEGHAN and PRADAD (Digitized Schemes for Subject Classification and Thesauri: Complementary Roles) demonstrate how thesaural relationships (NT, BT, and RT) can be applied to a classification scheme, the Colon Classification in this Gase. NEELAMEGHAN and ASUNDI (Metadata Framework for Describing Embodied Knowledge and Subject Content) propose to use the Generalized Facet Structure framework which is based an Ranganathan's General Theory of Knowledge Classification as a framework for describing the content of documents in a metadata element set for the representation of web documents. CHUDAMANI (Classified Catalogue as a Tool for Subject Based Information Retrieval in both Traditional and Electronic Library Environment) explains why the classified catalogue is superior to the alphabetic cata logue and argues that the same is true in the digital environment.
PARAMESWARAN (Classification and Indexing: Impact of Classification Theory an PRECIS) reviews the PRECIS system and finds that "it Gould not escape from the impact of the theory of classification" (p. 131). The author further argues that the purpose of classification and subject indexing is the same and that both approaches depends an syntax. This leads to the conclusion that "there is an absolute syntax as the Indian theory of classification points out" (p. 131). SATYAPAL and SANJIVINI SATYAPAL (Classifying Documents According to Postulational Approach: 1. SA TSAN- A Computer Based Learning Package) and SATYAPAL and SANJIVINI SATYAPAL (Classifying Documents According to Postulational Approach: 2. Semi-Automatic Synthesis of CC Numbers) present an application to automate classification using a facet classification system, in this Gase, the Colon Classification system. GAIKAIWARI (An Interactive Application for Faceted Classification Systems) presents an application, called SRR, for managing and using a faceted classification scheme in a digital environment. IYER (Use of Instructional Technology to Support Traditional Classroom Learning: A Case Study) describes a course an "Information and Knowledge Organization" that she teaches at the University at Albany (SUNY). The course is a conceptual course that introduces the student to various aspects of knowledge organization. GOPINATH (Universal Classification: How can it be used?) lists fifteen uses of universal classifications and discusses the entities of a number of disciplines. GOPINATH (Knowledge Classification: The Theory of Classification) briefly reviews the foundations for research in automatic classification, summarizes the history of classification, and places Ranganathan's thought in the history of classification.
Discussion The proceedings of the National Seminar an Classification in the Digital Environment give some insights. However, the depth of analysis and discussion is very uneven across the papers. Some of the papers have substantive research content while others appear to be notes used in the oral presentation. The treatments of the topics are very general in nature. Some papers have a very limited list of references while others have no bibliography. No index has been provided. The transfer of bibliographic knowledge organization theory to the digital environment is an important topic. However, as the papers at this conference have shown, it is also a difficult task. Of the 18 papers presented at this seminar an classification in the digital environment, only 4-5 papers actually deal directly with this important topic. The remaining papers deal with issues that are more or less relevant to classification in the digital environment without explicitly discussing the relation. The reason could be that the authors take up issues in knowledge organization that still need to be investigated and clarified before their application in the digital environment can be considered. Nonetheless, one wishes that the knowledge organization community would discuss the application of classification theory in the digital environment in greater detail. It is obvious from the comparisons of the classificatory structures of bibliographic classification systems and Web directories that these are different and that they probably should be different, since they serve different purposes. Interesting questions in the transformation of bibliographic classification theories to the digital environment are: "Given the existing principles in bibliographic knowledge organization, what are the optimum principles for organization of information, irrespectively of context?" and "What are the fundamental theoretical and practical principles for the construction of Web directories?" Unfortunately, the papers presented at this seminar do not attempt to answer or discuss these questions."

Imprint

Bangalore : Sarada Ranganathan Endowment for Library science

0.0718302 = product of:
  0.10774529 = sum of:
    0.088159174 = weight(_text_:digital in 4742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.088159174 = score(doc=4742,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20228553 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051282257 = queryNorm
        0.4358155 = fieldWeight in 4742, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4742)
    0.01958612 = product of:
      0.03917224 = sum of:
        0.03917224 = weight(_text_:library in 4742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03917224 = score(doc=4742,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13484047 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051282257 = queryNorm
            0.29050803 = fieldWeight in 4742, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4742)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

0.067322284 = product of:
  0.10098342 = sum of:
    0.087273136 = weight(_text_:digital in 232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.087273136 = score(doc=232,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.20228553 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051282257 = queryNorm
        0.43143538 = fieldWeight in 232, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=232)
    0.013710285 = product of:
      0.02742057 = sum of:
        0.02742057 = weight(_text_:library in 232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02742057 = score(doc=232,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13484047 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051282257 = queryNorm
            0.20335563 = fieldWeight in 232, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=232)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

This paper examines some traditional information searching methods and their role in Hungarian OPACs. What challenges are there in the digital and online environment? How do users work with them and do they give users satisfactory results? What kinds of techniques are users employing? In this paper I examine the user interfaces of UDC, thesauri, subject headings etc. in the Hungarian library. The key question of the paper is whether a universal system or local solutions is the best approach for searching in the digital environment.

0.060949948 = product of:
  0.09142492 = sum of:
    0.07480554 = weight(_text_:digital in 942) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07480554 = score(doc=942,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.20228553 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051282257 = queryNorm
        0.36980176 = fieldWeight in 942, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=942)
    0.016619375 = product of:
      0.03323875 = sum of:
        0.03323875 = weight(_text_:library in 942) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03323875 = score(doc=942,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.13484047 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051282257 = queryNorm
            0.24650425 = fieldWeight in 942, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=942)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Content

1. Increased Importance of Knowledge Organization in Internet Services - 2. Quality Subject Service and the role of classification - 3. Developing the DDC into a knowledge organization instrument for the digital library. OCLC site - 4. DESIRE's Barefoot Solutions of Automatic Classification - 5. Advanced Classification Solutions in DESIRE and CORC - 6. Future directions of research and development - 7. General references

0.060949948 = product of:
  0.09142492 = sum of:
    0.07480554 = weight(_text_:digital in 2416) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07480554 = score(doc=2416,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.20228553 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051282257 = queryNorm
        0.36980176 = fieldWeight in 2416, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2416)
    0.016619375 = product of:
      0.03323875 = sum of:
        0.03323875 = weight(_text_:library in 2416) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03323875 = score(doc=2416,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.13484047 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051282257 = queryNorm
            0.24650425 = fieldWeight in 2416, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2416)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Two library classification system interfaces have been implemented for navigating and searching large collections of document and book records. One interface allows the user to browse book records organized by the DDC hierarchy. A Book Shelf display reflects the facet position in the classification hierarchy during browsing, and it dynamically updates to reflect search hits and attribute selections. The other interface provides access to records describing computer science documents classified by the ACM Computing Reviews (CR) system. The CR classification system is a type of faceted classification in which documents can appear at several points in the hierarchy. These two interfaces demonstrate that classification structure can be effectively utilized for organizing digital libraries and, potentiall, collections of Internet-wide information services

0.05746416 = product of:
  0.08619624 = sum of:
    0.07052734 = weight(_text_:digital in 4962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07052734 = score(doc=4962,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20228553 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051282257 = queryNorm
        0.34865242 = fieldWeight in 4962, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4962)
    0.015668897 = product of:
      0.031337794 = sum of:
        0.031337794 = weight(_text_:library in 4962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031337794 = score(doc=4962,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13484047 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051282257 = queryNorm
            0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 4962, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4962)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Subject based classification is an important part of information retrieval, and has a long history in libraries, where a subject taxonomy was used to determine the location of books on the shelves. We have been studying the notion of subject itself, in order to determine a formal ontology of subject for a large scale digital library card catalog system. Deep analysis reveals a lot of ambiguity regarding the usage of subjects in existing systems and terminology, and we attempt to formalize these notions into a single framework for representing it.

0.057427432 = product of:
  0.08614115 = sum of:
    0.07634809 = weight(_text_:digital in 2414) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07634809 = score(doc=2414,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.20228553 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051282257 = queryNorm
        0.37742734 = fieldWeight in 2414, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2414)
    0.00979306 = product of:
      0.01958612 = sum of:
        0.01958612 = weight(_text_:library in 2414) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01958612 = score(doc=2414,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13484047 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051282257 = queryNorm
            0.14525402 = fieldWeight in 2414, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2414)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Source

Digital libraries: current issues ; selected papers / Digital Libraries Workshop DL '94, Newark, NJ, USA, May 19 - 20, 1994. Ed.: Nabil R. Adam

0.047015347 = product of:
  0.070523016 = sum of:
    0.05289551 = weight(_text_:digital in 1202) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05289551 = score(doc=1202,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.20228553 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051282257 = queryNorm
        0.26148933 = fieldWeight in 1202, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1202)
    0.017627507 = product of:
      0.035255015 = sum of:
        0.035255015 = weight(_text_:library in 1202) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035255015 = score(doc=1202,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.13484047 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051282257 = queryNorm
            0.2614572 = fieldWeight in 1202, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1202)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The concept of c-space is proposed as a visualization schema relating containers of content to cataloging surrogates and classification structures. Possible applications of keyword vector clusters within c-space could include improved retrieval rates through the use of captioning within visual hierarchies, tracings of semantic bleeding among subclasses, and access to buried knowledge within subject-neutral publication containers. The Scholastica Project is described as one example, following a tradition of research dating back to the 1980's. Preliminary focus group assessment indicates that this type of classification rendering may offer digital library searchers enriched entry strategies and an expanded range of re-entry vocabularies. Those of us who work in traditional libraries typically assume that our systems of classification: Library of Congress Classification (LCC) and Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), are descriptive rather than prescriptive. In other words, LCC classes and subclasses approximate natural groupings of texts that reflect an underlying order of knowledge, rather than arbitrary categories prescribed by librarians to facilitate efficient shelving. Philosophical support for this assumption has traditionally been found in a number of places, from the archetypal tree of knowledge, to Aristotelian categories, to the concept of discursive formations proposed by Michel Foucault. Gary P. Radford has elegantly described an encounter with Foucault's discursive formations in the traditional library setting: "Just by looking at the titles on the spines, you can see how the books cluster together...You can identify those books that seem to form the heart of the discursive formation and those books that reside on the margins. Moving along the shelves, you see those books that tend to bleed over into other classifications and that straddle multiple discursive formations. You can physically and sensually experience...those points that feel like state borders or national boundaries, those points where one subject ends and another begins, or those magical places where one subject has morphed into another..."
But what happens to this awareness in a digital library? Can discursive formations be represented in cyberspace, perhaps through diagrams in a visualization interface? And would such a schema be helpful to a digital library user? To approach this question, it is worth taking a moment to reconsider what Radford is looking at. First, he looks at titles to see how the books cluster. To illustrate, I scanned one hundred books on the shelves of a college library under subclass HT 101-395, defined by the LCC subclass caption as Urban groups. The City. Urban sociology. Of the first 100 titles in this sequence, fifty included the word "urban" or variants (e.g. "urbanization"). Another thirty-five used the word "city" or variants. These keywords appear to mark their titles as the heart of this discursive formation. The scattering of titles not using "urban" or "city" used related terms such as "town," "community," or in one case "skyscrapers." So we immediately see some empirical correlation between keywords and classification. But we also see a problem with the commonly used search technique of title-keyword. A student interested in urban studies will want to know about this entire subclass, and may wish to browse every title available therein. A title-keyword search on "urban" will retrieve only half of the titles, while a search on "city" will retrieve just over a third. There will be no overlap, since no titles in this sample contain both words. The only place where both words appear in a common string is in the LCC subclass caption, but captions are not typically indexed in library Online Public Access Catalogs (OPACs). In a traditional library, this problem is mitigated when the student goes to the shelf looking for any one of the books and suddenly discovers a much wider selection than the keyword search had led him to expect. But in a digital library, the issue of non-retrieval can be more problematic, as studies have indicated. Micco and Popp reported that, in a study funded partly by the U.S. Department of Education, 65 of 73 unskilled users searching for material on U.S./Soviet foreign relations found some material but never realized they had missed a large percentage of what was in the database.

0.04634326 = product of:
  0.069514886 = sum of:
    0.05289551 = weight(_text_:digital in 4429) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05289551 = score(doc=4429,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20228553 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051282257 = queryNorm
        0.26148933 = fieldWeight in 4429, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4429)
    0.016619375 = product of:
      0.03323875 = sum of:
        0.03323875 = weight(_text_:library in 4429) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03323875 = score(doc=4429,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.13484047 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051282257 = queryNorm
            0.24650425 = fieldWeight in 4429, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4429)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The application of classification schemes and thesauri to improve online information retrieval can be traced back to the beginnings of online searching itself, but the true potential for using knowledge structures in the user interface has yet to be realized. View-based searching seeks to exploit the classified arrangements in thesauri and existing classification schemes to improve the performance of such systems. HIBROWSE for EMBASE is a system which demonstrates the power of applying an approach to information retrieval which is strongly related to faceted classification. It does this by employing a point a click user interface with mutually constraining views utilising knowledge structure hierarchies for both query specification and the presentation of results. The relevance of this approach to library OPACs is discussed in the context of the digital library, concluding that out legacy of research in classification and indexing is more relevant than ever in the design of systems to cope with the problems of information access

0.045378394 = product of:
  0.06806759 = sum of:
    0.044079587 = weight(_text_:digital in 5148) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044079587 = score(doc=5148,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20228553 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051282257 = queryNorm
        0.21790776 = fieldWeight in 5148, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5148)
    0.023988001 = product of:
      0.047976002 = sum of:
        0.047976002 = weight(_text_:library in 5148) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047976002 = score(doc=5148,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.13484047 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051282257 = queryNorm
            0.35579824 = fieldWeight in 5148, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5148)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Documents in digital and paper libraries may be arranged, based on their topics, in order to facilitate browsing. It may seem intuitively obvious that ordering documents by their subject should improve browsing performance; the results presented in this article suggest that ordering library materials by their Gray code values and through using links consistent with the small world model of document relationships is consistent with improving browsing performance. Below, library circulation data, including ordering with Library of Congress Classification numbers and Library of Congress Subject Headings, are used to provide information useful in generating user-centered document arrangements, as well as user-independent arrangements. Documents may be linearly arranged so they can be placed in a line by topic, such as on a library shelf, or in a list on a computer display. Crossover links, jumps between a document and another document to which it is not adjacent, can be used in library databases to allow additional paths that one might take when browsing. The improvement that is obtained with different combinations of document orderings and different crossovers is examined and applications suggested.

0.044925816 = product of:
  0.06738872 = sum of:
    0.04987036 = weight(_text_:digital in 6486) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04987036 = score(doc=6486,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.20228553 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051282257 = queryNorm
        0.2465345 = fieldWeight in 6486, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=6486)
    0.017518358 = product of:
      0.035036717 = sum of:
        0.035036717 = weight(_text_:library in 6486) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035036717 = score(doc=6486,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.13484047 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051282257 = queryNorm
            0.25983828 = fieldWeight in 6486, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=6486)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The scatter of items dealing with similar concepts through the physical library is a consequence of a classification process that produces a single notation to enable relative location. Compromises must be made to place an item where it is most appropriate for a given user community. No such compromise is needed with a digital library where the item can be considered to occupy a very large number of relative locations, as befits the needs of the user. Interfaces to these digital libraries can reuse the knowledge structures of their physical counterparts yet still address the problem of scatter. View-based searching is an approach that takes advantage of the knowledge structures but addresses the problem of scatter by applying a facetted approach to information retrieval. This paper describes the most recent developments in the implementation of a view-based searching system for a University Library OPAC. The user interface exploits the knowledge structures in the Dewey Decimal Classification Scheme (DDC) in navigable views with implicit Boolean searching. DDC classifies multifaceted items by building a single relative code from components. These codes may already have been combined in the schedules or be built according to well-documented instructions. Rules can be applied to decode these numbers to provide codes for each additional facet. To enhance the retrieval power of the view-based searching system, multiple facet codes are being extracted through decomposition from single Dewey Class Codes. This paper presents the results of applying automatic decomposition in respect of Geographic Area and the creation of a view (by Geographic Area) for the full collection of over 250,000 library items. This is the first step in demonstrating how the problem of scatter of subject matter across the disciplines of the Dewey Decimal Classification and the physical library collection can be addressed through the use of facets and view-based searching

0.043098122 = product of:
  0.06464718 = sum of:
    0.05289551 = weight(_text_:digital in 5174) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05289551 = score(doc=5174,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20228553 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051282257 = queryNorm
        0.26148933 = fieldWeight in 5174, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5174)
    0.011751671 = product of:
      0.023503343 = sum of:
        0.023503343 = weight(_text_:library in 5174) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023503343 = score(doc=5174,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13484047 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051282257 = queryNorm
            0.17430481 = fieldWeight in 5174, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5174)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

A team at the University of Michigan School of Information designed, implemented and is evaluating a WWW-based experimental system which uses classification to facilitate browsing of art images. The research team built a database of approximately 3.000 digitized images from Art History to determine if classification can be used for retrieving images from a digital database in a networked environment. A key premise in this research is that browsing can serve an important role in retrieving image information. The system was evaluated in controlled tests and through a questionnaire available to WWW users

Source

Knowledge organization and change: Proceedings of the Fourth International ISKO Conference, 15-18 July 1996, Library of Congress, Washington, DC. Ed.: R. Green

0.043098122 = product of:
  0.06464718 = sum of:
    0.05289551 = weight(_text_:digital in 4394) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05289551 = score(doc=4394,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20228553 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051282257 = queryNorm
        0.26148933 = fieldWeight in 4394, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4394)
    0.011751671 = product of:
      0.023503343 = sum of:
        0.023503343 = weight(_text_:library in 4394) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023503343 = score(doc=4394,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13484047 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051282257 = queryNorm
            0.17430481 = fieldWeight in 4394, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4394)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The term "facet" has been used in various places, while in most cases it is just a buzz word to replace what is indeed "aspect" or "category". The references below either define and explain the original concept of facet or provide guidelines for building 'real' faceted search/browse. I was interested in faceted classification because it seems to be a natural and efficient way for organizing and browsing Web collections. However, to automatically generate facets and their isolates is extremely difficult since it involves concept extraction and concept grouping, both of which are difficult problems by themselves. And it is almost impossible to achieve mutually exclusive and jointly exhaustive 'true' facets without human judgment. Nowadays, faceted search/browse widely exists, implicitly or explicitly, on a majority of retail websites due to the multi-aspects nature of the data. However, it is still rarely seen on any digital library sites. (I could be wrong since I haven't kept myself updated with this field for a while.)

0.038619377 = product of:
  0.057929065 = sum of:
    0.044079587 = weight(_text_:digital in 1489) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044079587 = score(doc=1489,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20228553 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051282257 = queryNorm
        0.21790776 = fieldWeight in 1489, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1489)
    0.013849478 = product of:
      0.027698956 = sum of:
        0.027698956 = weight(_text_:library in 1489) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027698956 = score(doc=1489,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.13484047 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051282257 = queryNorm
            0.2054202 = fieldWeight in 1489, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1489)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

In 2001, a group of information architects involved in designing websites, and knowledge management specialists involved in creating access to corporate knowledge bases appeared to have re-discovered facet analysis and faceted classification. These groups have been instrumental in creating new and different ways of handling digital content of the Internet. Some of these practitioners explicitly use the forms and language of facet analysis and faceted classification, while others seem to do so implicitly. Following a brief overview of the work and discussions on facets and faceted classification in recent years, we focus on our observations about new information resources which seem more in line with the Fourth law of Library Science ("Save the time of the reader") than most library OPACs today. These new developments on the Internet point to a partial grasp of a disciplined approach to subject access. This is where Ranganathan and Neelameghan's approach needs to be reviewed for the new audience of information system designers. A report on the work undertaken by us forms a principal part of this paper.

0.038469873 = product of:
  0.05770481 = sum of:
    0.04987036 = weight(_text_:digital in 2) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04987036 = score(doc=2,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.20228553 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051282257 = queryNorm
        0.2465345 = fieldWeight in 2, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2)
    0.0078344485 = product of:
      0.015668897 = sum of:
        0.015668897 = weight(_text_:library in 2) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015668897 = score(doc=2,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13484047 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051282257 = queryNorm
            0.11620321 = fieldWeight in 2, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

In the present work we discuss opportunities, problems, tools and techniques encountered when interconnecting discipline-specific subject classifications, primarily organized as search devices in bibliographic databases, with general classifications originally devised for book shelving in public libraries. We first state the fundamental distinction between topical (or subject) classifications and object classifications. Then we trace the structural limitations that have constrained subject classifications since their library origins, and the devices that were used to overcome the gap with genuine knowledge representation. After recalling some general notions on structure, dynamics and interferences of subject classifications and of the objects they refer to, we sketch a synthetic overview on discipline-specific classifications in Mathematics, Computing and Physics, on one hand, and on general classifications on the other. In this setting we present The Scientific Classifications Page, which collects groups of Web pages produced by a pool of software tools for developing hypertextual presentations of single or paired subject classifications from sequential source files, as well as facilities for gathering information from KWIC lists of classification descriptions. Further we propose a concept-oriented methodology for interconnecting subject classifications, with the concrete support of a relational analysis of the whole Mathematics Subject Classification through its evolution since 1959. Finally, we recall a very basic method for interconnection provided by coreference in bibliographic records among index elements from different systems, and point out the advantages of establishing the conditions of a more widespread application of such a method. A part of these contents was presented under the title Mathematics Subject Classification and related Classifications in the Digital World at the Eighth International Conference Crimea 2001, "Libraries and Associations in the Transient World: New Technologies and New Forms of Cooperation", Sudak, Ukraine, June 9-17, 2001, in a special session on electronic libraries, electronic publishing and electronic information in science chaired by Bernd Wegner, Editor-in-Chief of Zentralblatt MATH.

0.0359151 = product of:
  0.053872645 = sum of:
    0.044079587 = weight(_text_:digital in 12) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044079587 = score(doc=12,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20228553 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051282257 = queryNorm
        0.21790776 = fieldWeight in 12, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=12)
    0.00979306 = product of:
      0.01958612 = sum of:
        0.01958612 = weight(_text_:library in 12) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01958612 = score(doc=12,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13484047 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051282257 = queryNorm
            0.14525402 = fieldWeight in 12, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=12)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The vision of the semantic web is gradually unfolding and taking shape through a web of linked data, a part of which is built by capturing semantics stored in existing knowledge organization systems (KOS), subject metadata and resource metadata. The content of vast bibliographic collections is currently categorized by some widely used bibliographic classification and we may soon see them being mined for information and linked in a meaningful way across the web. Bibliographic classifications are designed for knowledge mediation, which offers both a rich terminology and different ways in which concepts can be categorized and related to each other in the universe of knowledge. From 1990 to 2010 they have been used in various resource discovery services on the web, and they continue to be used to support information integration in a number of international digital library projects. In this chapter we will revisit some of the ways in which universal classifications, as language-independent concept schemes, can assist humans and computers in structuring and presenting information and formulating queries. Most importantly, we will highlight issues important to understanding bibliographic classifications, identifying both their unused potential and their technical limitations.

0.03449247 = product of:
  0.1034774 = sum of:
    0.1034774 = sum of:
      0.05484114 = weight(_text_:library in 2342) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05484114 = score(doc=2342,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.13484047 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051282257 = queryNorm
          0.40671125 = fieldWeight in 2342, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2342)
      0.048636265 = weight(_text_:22 in 2342) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.048636265 = score(doc=2342,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17958173 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051282257 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2342, 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=2342)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The knowledge structures that form traditional library classification schemes hold great potential for improving resource description and discovery on the Internet and for organizing electronic document collections. The advantages of assigning subject tokens (classes) to documents from a scheme like the DDC system are well documented

Date

22. 9.1997 19:16:05

Imprint

Urbana-Champaign, IL : Illinois University at Urbana-Champaign, Graduate School of Library and Information Science

Source

Visualizing subject access for 21st century information resources: Papers presented at the 1997 Clinic on Library Applications of Data Processing, 2-4 Mar 1997, Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Ed.: P.A. Cochrane et al

0.031414434 = product of:
  0.0942433 = sum of:
    0.0942433 = sum of:
      0.052555077 = weight(_text_:library in 769) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.052555077 = score(doc=769,freq=10.0), product of:
          0.13484047 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051282257 = queryNorm
          0.38975742 = fieldWeight in 769, product of:
            3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
              10.0 = termFreq=10.0
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=769)
      0.041688226 = weight(_text_:22 in 769) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041688226 = score(doc=769,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17958173 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051282257 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 769, 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=769)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The Hierarchical Interface to Library of Congress Classification (HILCC) is a system developed by the Columbia University Library to leverage call number data from the MARC holdings records in Columbia's online catalog to create a structured, hierarchical menuing system that provides subject access to the library's electronic resources. In this paper, the authors describe a research initiative at the Cornell University Library to discover if the Columbia HILCC scheme can be used as developed or in modified form to create a virtual undergraduate print collection outside the context of the traditional online catalog. Their results indicate that, with certain adjustments, an HILCC model can indeed, be used to represent the holdings of a large research library's undergraduate collection of approximately 150,000 titles, but that such a model is not infinitely scalable and may require a new approach to browsing such a large information space.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

Source

Library resources and technical services. 50(2006) no.3, S.157-165