Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

0.028222147 = product of:
  0.14111073 = sum of:
    0.14111073 = weight(_text_:22 in 1630) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14111073 = score(doc=1630,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18236019 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052075688 = queryNorm
        0.77380234 = fieldWeight in 1630, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.15625 = fieldNorm(doc=1630)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

International classification. 8(1981), S.16-22

0.020205619 = product of:
  0.10102809 = sum of:
    0.10102809 = weight(_text_:7 in 1619) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10102809 = score(doc=1619,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17251469 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3127685 = idf(docFreq=4376, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052075688 = queryNorm
        0.5856202 = fieldWeight in 1619, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3127685 = idf(docFreq=4376, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1619)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

Advances in librarianship. 7(1977), S.41-103

0.015154215 = product of:
  0.07577107 = sum of:
    0.07577107 = weight(_text_:7 in 6047) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07577107 = score(doc=6047,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17251469 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3127685 = idf(docFreq=4376, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052075688 = queryNorm
        0.43921518 = fieldWeight in 6047, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3127685 = idf(docFreq=4376, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6047)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

7. 1.1997 17:39:26

0.009978036 = product of:
  0.04989018 = sum of:
    0.04989018 = weight(_text_:22 in 1493) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04989018 = score(doc=1493,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.18236019 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052075688 = queryNorm
        0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 1493, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1493)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 9.2014 19:01:18

Source

Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik

0.0075771073 = product of:
  0.037885536 = sum of:
    0.037885536 = weight(_text_:7 in 2100) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.037885536 = score(doc=2100,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17251469 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3127685 = idf(docFreq=4376, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052075688 = queryNorm
        0.21960759 = fieldWeight in 2100, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3127685 = idf(docFreq=4376, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2100)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

The implications of contributions from philosophy of science to classification theory and the construction of a new universal classification system are discussed. Starting from the purposes of universal systems and what has been considered so far to serve as main classes of the six existing major universal systems, the following theories have been treated: Theory of (1) knowledge, (2) knowledge elements and units, (3) systems, (4) the science concept, (5) knowledge fields including criteria for their identification, (6) a logical syntax, (7) an overall structure of object and aspect areas. Concludingly an evaluation was made with special regard to the representability (notation) of such a theory-based universal concept system by computer and in telecommunication. This, as well as the heuristics contained in such a theory-based system facilitate its general applicability

0.0044648536 = product of:
  0.022324268 = sum of:
    0.022324268 = weight(_text_:7 in 4300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022324268 = score(doc=4300,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.17251469 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3127685 = idf(docFreq=4376, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052075688 = queryNorm
        0.12940502 = fieldWeight in 4300, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.3127685 = idf(docFreq=4376, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=4300)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

In 2009 ISKO had its 20th anniversary, a time for review and reflection on what might be envisaged to further Knowledge Organization in the forthcoming years. In addition to some proposals set forth at the end of this contribution, ten desiderata appear urgent. A preliminary condition to any other consideration is the recognition of the fundamental difference in the organization of knowledge between the concept (i.e., the unit of knowledge)-the conceptual level-and the word, term or code-the verbal level-and the need for implementing this distinction in theory and practice (Desideratum 1). On this basis, some further proposals are enunciated. The 2nd proposition concerns the surveying of extant classification systems, thesauri, and other means of organizing, ordering, and indexing knowledge; the 3rd proposition envisages the improvement of expert training in Knowledge Organization (KO), also with regard to curricula and professional acknowledgment. Nr.4) refers to the professionalization of the hitherto rather neglected national ISKO secretariats, as well as the international ISKO secretariat. Nr.5) urges a systematic survey of KO-relevant concepts to serve as a model or standard for other subject fields, Nr.6) claims the establishment of KO Institutes, Nr.7) views consultancy to the effect that anybody interested in KO may approach ISKO for help, Nr 8) urges ISKO's promotion of membership and chapters in as many countries as possible, Nr.9) presses for intensification of ISKO's publication activities, and Nr.10) pleads for KO as a scientific discipline on its own.

Content

6. Establishment of national Knowledge Organization Institutes should be scheduled by national chapters, planned energetically and submitted to corresponding administrative authorities for support. They could be attached to research institutions, e.g., the Max-Planck or Fraunhofer Institutes in Germany or to universities. Their scope and research areas relate to the elaboration of knowledge systems of subject related concepts, according to Desideratum 1, and may be connected to training activities and KOsubject-related research work. 7. ISKO experts should not accept to be impressed by Internet and Computer Science, but should demonstrate their expertise more actively on the public plane. They should tend to take a leading part in the ISKO Secretariats and the KO Institutes, and act as consultants and informants, as well as editors of statistics and other publications. 8. All colleagues trained in the field of classification/indexing and thesauri construction and active in different countries should be identified and approached for membership in ISKO. This would have to be accomplished by the General Secretariat with the collaboration of the experts in the different secretariats of the countries, as soon as they start to work. The more members ISKO will have, the greater will be its reputation and influence. But it will also prove its professionalism by the quality of its products, especially its innovating conceptual order systems to come. 9. ISKO should-especially in view of global expansion-intensify the promotion of knowledge about its own subject area through the publications mentioned here and in further publications as deemed necessary. It should be made clear that, especially in ISKO's own publications, professional subject indexes are a sine qua non. 10. 1) Knowledge Organization, having arisen from librarianship and documentation, the contents of which has many points of contact with numerous application fields, should-although still linked up with its areas of descent-be recognized in the long run as an independent autonomous discipline to be located under the science of science, since only thereby can it fully play its role as an equal partner in all application fields; and, 2) An "at-a-first-glance knowledge order" could be implemented through the Information Coding Classification (ICC), as this system is based on an entirely new approach, namely based on general object areas, thus deviating from discipline-oriented main classes of the current main universal classification systems. It can therefore recoup by simple display on screen the hitherto lost overview of all knowledge areas and fields. On "one look", one perceives 9 object areas subdivided into 9 aspects which break down into 81 subject areas with their 729 subject fields, including further special fields. The synthesis and place of order of all knowledge becomes thus evident at a glance to everybody. Nobody would any longer be irritated by the abundance of singular apparently unrelated knowledge fields or become hesitant in his/her understanding of the world.