Search (49 results, page 1 of 3)

0.09806815 = product of:
  0.14710222 = sum of:
    0.12014602 = weight(_text_:sites in 2871) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12014602 = score(doc=2871,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.26002133 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.227637 = idf(docFreq=644, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049739745 = queryNorm
        0.46206218 = fieldWeight in 2871, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.227637 = idf(docFreq=644, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2871)
    0.026956195 = product of:
      0.05391239 = sum of:
        0.05391239 = weight(_text_:22 in 2871) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05391239 = score(doc=2871,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1741801 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049739745 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2871, 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=2871)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

This is a report on how Doyle and others made a faceted classification scheme for content management systems and made it browsable on the web (see CMS Review in Example Web Sites, below). They discuss why they did it, how, their use of OPML and XFML, how they did research to find terms and categories, and they also include their taxonomy. It is interesting to see facets used in a business environment.

Date

30. 7.2004 12:22:52

0.050060846 = product of:
  0.15018253 = sum of:
    0.15018253 = weight(_text_:sites in 6673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.15018253 = score(doc=6673,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.26002133 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.227637 = idf(docFreq=644, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049739745 = queryNorm
        0.5775777 = fieldWeight in 6673, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.227637 = idf(docFreq=644, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=6673)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The specification for XFML, a markup language designed to handle faceted classifications. Browsing the site (http://www.xfml.org/) will reveal news about XFML and links to related software and web sites. XFML is not an officially recognized Internet standard, but is the de facto standard.

0.043158483 = product of:
  0.12947544 = sum of:
    0.12947544 = sum of:
      0.08904115 = weight(_text_:index in 4190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08904115 = score(doc=4190,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.21735094 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049739745 = queryNorm
          0.40966535 = fieldWeight in 4190, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4190)
      0.04043429 = weight(_text_:22 in 4190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04043429 = score(doc=4190,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1741801 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049739745 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4190, 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=4190)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Creates an open, metadata aware system for distributed, collaborative WWW indexing. The system has 3 main components: a harvester (for collecting information), a database (for making the collection searchable), and a user interface (for making the information available). all components can be distributed across networked computers, thus supporting scalability. The system is metadata aware and thus allows searches on several fields including title, document author and URL. Nordic Web Index (NWI) is an application using this system to create a regional Nordic Web-indexing service. NWI is built using 5 collaborating service points within the Nordic countries. The NWI databases can be used to build additional services

Date

1. 8.1996 22:08:06

Object

Nordic Web Index

0.03311214 = product of:
  0.09933641 = sum of:
    0.09933641 = weight(_text_:sites in 2467) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09933641 = score(doc=2467,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.26002133 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.227637 = idf(docFreq=644, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049739745 = queryNorm
        0.38203177 = fieldWeight in 2467, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          5.227637 = idf(docFreq=644, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2467)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Consider movie listings in newspapers. Most Canadian newspapers list movie showtimes in two large blocks, for the two major theatre chains. The listings are ordered by region (in large cities), then theatre, then movie, and finally by showtime. Anyone wondering where and when a particular movie is playing must scan the complete listings. Determining what movies are playing in the next half hour is very difficult. When movie listings went onto the web, most sites used a simple faceted organization, always with movie name and theatre, and perhaps with region or neighbourhood (thankfully, theatre chains were left out). They make it easy to pick a theatre and see what movies are playing there, or to pick a movie and see what theatres are showing it. To complete the system, the sites should allow users to browse by neighbourhood and showtime, and to order the results in any way they desired. Thus could people easily find answers to such questions as, "Where is the new James Bond movie playing?" "What's showing at the Roxy tonight?" "I'm going to be out in in Little Finland this afternoon with three hours to kill starting at 2 ... is anything interesting playing?" A hypertext, faceted classification system makes more useful information more easily available to the user. Reading the books and articles below in chronological order will show a certain progression: suggestions that faceting and hypertext might work well, confidence that facets would work well if only someone would make such a system, and finally the beginning of serious work on actually designing, building, and testing faceted web sites. There is a solid basis of how to make faceted classifications (see Vickery in Recommended), but their application online is just starting. Work on XFML (see Van Dijck's work in Recommended) the Exchangeable Faceted Metadata Language, will make this easier. If it follows previous patterns, parts of the Internet community will embrace the idea and make open source software available for others to reuse. It will be particularly beneficial if professionals in both information studies and computer science can work together to build working systems, standards, and code. Each can benefit from the other's expertise in what can be a very complicated and technical area. One particularly nice thing about this area of research is that people interested in combining facets and the web often have web sites where they post their writings.
This bibliography is not meant to be exhaustive, but unfortunately it is not as complete as I wanted. Some books and articles are not be included, but they may be used in my future work. (These include two books and one article by B.C. Vickery: Faceted Classification Schemes (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers, 1966), Classification and Indexing in Science, 3rd ed. (London: Butterworths, 1975), and "Knowledge Representation: A Brief Review" (Journal of Documentation 42 no. 3 (September 1986): 145-159; and A.C. Foskett's "The Future of Faceted Classification" in The Future of Classification, edited by Rita Marcella and Arthur Maltby (Aldershot, England: Gower, 2000): 69-80). Nevertheless, I hope this bibliography will be useful for those both new to or familiar with faceted hypertext systems. Some very basic resources are listed, as well as some very advanced ones. Some example web sites are mentioned, but there is no detailed technical discussion of any software. The user interface to any web site is extremely important, and this is briefly mentioned in two or three places (for example the discussion of lawforwa.org (see Example Web Sites)). The larger question of how to display information graphically and with hypertext is outside the scope of this bibliography. There are five sections: Recommended, Background, Not Relevant, Example Web Sites, and Mailing Lists. Background material is either introductory, advanced, or of peripheral interest, and can be read after the Recommended resources if the reader wants to know more. The Not Relevant category contains articles that may appear in bibliographies but are not relevant for my purposes.

0.030036507 = product of:
  0.09010952 = sum of:
    0.09010952 = weight(_text_:sites in 6739) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09010952 = score(doc=6739,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.26002133 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.227637 = idf(docFreq=644, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049739745 = queryNorm
        0.34654665 = fieldWeight in 6739, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.227637 = idf(docFreq=644, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6739)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Possibilities are being explored to use traditional bibliographic tools, like Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), Library of Congress Classification (LCC), Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH), and Universal Decimal Classification (UDC), to improve the organization of information resources on the Internet. The most recent edition of DDC, with its enhanced features, has greater potential than other traditional approaches. A review of selected Web sites that use DDC to organize Web resources indicates, however, that the full potential of the DDC scheme for this purpose has not been realized. While the review found that the DDC classification structure was more effective when compared with other knowledge organization systems, we conclude that DDC needs to be further enhanced to make it more suitable for this application. As widely reported in the professional literature, OCLC has conducted research on the potential of DDC for organizing Web resources. Such research, however, is experimental and should be supplemented by empirical studies with user participation.

0.030036507 = product of:
  0.09010952 = sum of:
    0.09010952 = weight(_text_:sites in 2471) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09010952 = score(doc=2471,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.26002133 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.227637 = idf(docFreq=644, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049739745 = queryNorm
        0.34654665 = fieldWeight in 2471, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.227637 = idf(docFreq=644, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2471)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This is a short, but very thorough and very interesting, report on how the writers built a faceted classification for some legal information and used it to structure a web site with navigation and searching. There is a good summary of why facets work well and how they fit into bibliographic control in general. The last section is about their implementation of a web site for the Washington State Bar Association's Council for Legal Public Education. Their classification uses three facets: Purpose (the general aim of the document, e.g. Resources for K-12 Teachers), Topic (the subject of the document), and Type (the legal format of the document). See Example Web Sites, below, for a discussion of the site and a problem with its design.

0.030036507 = product of:
  0.09010952 = sum of:
    0.09010952 = weight(_text_:sites in 2696) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09010952 = score(doc=2696,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.26002133 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.227637 = idf(docFreq=644, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049739745 = queryNorm
        0.34654665 = fieldWeight in 2696, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.227637 = idf(docFreq=644, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2696)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.030036507 = product of:
  0.09010952 = sum of:
    0.09010952 = weight(_text_:sites in 4394) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09010952 = score(doc=4394,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.26002133 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.227637 = idf(docFreq=644, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049739745 = queryNorm
        0.34654665 = fieldWeight in 4394, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.227637 = idf(docFreq=644, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4394)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

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.)

0.025860306 = product of:
  0.077580914 = sum of:
    0.077580914 = sum of:
      0.0367276 = weight(_text_:index in 4406) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0367276 = score(doc=4406,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.21735094 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049739745 = queryNorm
          0.16897833 = fieldWeight in 4406, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4406)
      0.04085331 = weight(_text_:22 in 4406) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04085331 = score(doc=4406,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.1741801 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049739745 = queryNorm
          0.23454636 = fieldWeight in 4406, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4406)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Content

"Am 16. August 2005 fand in Oslo im Rahmen der heurigen IFLA-Konferenz das alljährliche Treffen der DDC-Übersetzer und der weltweiten DeweyAnwender-Institutionen (Nationalbibliotheken, Ersteller von Nationalbibliografien) statt. Die im Sommer 2005 bereits abgeschlossene deutsche Übersetzung wird in der Druckfassung Ende des Jahres in 4 Bänden vorliegen, beim K. G. Saur Verlag in München erscheinen (ISBN 3-598-11651-9) und 2006 vom ebenfalls erstmals ins Deutsche übersetzten DDC-Lehrbuch (ISBN 3-598-11748-5) begleitet. Pläne für neu startende Übersetzungen der DDC 22 gibt es für folgende Sprachen: Arabisch (mit der wachsenden Notwendigkeit, Klasse 200 Religion zu revidieren), Französisch (es erschien zuletzt eine neue Kurzausgabe 14, nun werden eine vierbändige Druckausgabe und eine frz. Webversion anvisiert), Schwedisch, Vietnamesisch (hierfür wird eine an die Sprache und Schrift angepasste Version des deutschen Übersetzungstools zum Einsatz kommen).
Allgemein DDC 22 ist im Gegensatz zu den früheren Neuauflagen der Standard Edition eine Ausgabe ohne generelle Überarbeitung einer gesamten Klasse. Sie enthält jedoch zahlreiche Änderungen und Expansionen in fast allen Disziplinen und in vielen Hilfstafeln. Es erschien auch eine Sonderausgabe der Klasse 200, Religion. In der aktuellen Kurzausgabe der DDC 22 (14, aus 2004) sind all diese Neuerungen berücksichtigt. Auch die elektronische Version exisitiert in einer vollständigen (WebDewey) und in einer KurzVariante (Abridged WebDewey) und ist immer auf dem jüngsten Stand der Klassifikation. Ein Tutorial für die Nutzung von WebDewey steht unter www.oclc.org /dewey/ resourcesitutorial zur Verfügung. Der Index enthält in dieser elektronischen Fassung weit mehr zusammengesetzte Notationen und verbale Sucheinstiege (resultierend aus den Titeldaten des "WorldCat") als die Druckausgabe, sowie Mappings zu den aktuellsten Normdatensätzen aus LCSH und McSH. Aktuell Die personelle Zusammensetzung des EPC (Editorial Policy Committee) hat sich im letzten Jahr verändert. Dieses oberste Gremium der DDC hat Prioritäten für den aktuellen Arbeitsplan festgelegt. Es wurde vereinbart, größere Änderungsvorhaben via Dewey-Website künftig wie in einem Stellungnahmeverfahren zur fachlichen Diskussion zu stellen. www.oclc.org/dewey/discussion/."

0.02517578 = product of:
  0.07552734 = sum of:
    0.07552734 = sum of:
      0.051940672 = weight(_text_:index in 3353) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.051940672 = score(doc=3353,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.21735094 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049739745 = queryNorm
          0.23897146 = fieldWeight in 3353, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3353)
      0.02358667 = weight(_text_:22 in 3353) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02358667 = score(doc=3353,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1741801 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049739745 = queryNorm
          0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 3353, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3353)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Das in den letzten Jahren wiedererwachte Interesse an der klassifikatorischen Erschließung und Recherche hat sich allem Anschein nach noch nicht ausreichend bis zu den Herstellern integrierter Bibliothekssysteme herumgesprochen. Wie wäre es sonst zu erklären, dass im OPAC-Modul eines führenden Systems wie Aleph 500 so gut wie keine Features für klassifikationsbasierte Recherchen zu erblicken sind? Tatsächlich finden wir heute einen im Vergleich zum einstigen System Bibos kaum veränderten Zustand vor: Notationen eines oder mehrerer Klassifikationssysteme können in einer durch MAB dafür bestimmten Kategorie (700, nebst Indikatoren) katalogisiert und dann recherchiert bzw. angezeigt werden. Doch welcher Benutzer weiß schon, was diese Notationen im einzelnen bedeuten? Wer macht sich die Mühe, dies selbst herauszufinden, um dann danach zu recherchieren? Hier liegt im wesentlich dasselbe Problem vor, das schon dem systematischen Zettelkatalog anhaftete und ihn zu einem zwar mühevoll erstellten, aber wenig genutzten Rechercheinstrument machte, das nur dann (zwangsläufig) angenommen wurde, wenn ein verbaler Sachkatalog fehlte. Nun könnte eingewandt werden, dass im Vergleich zu früher unter Aleph 500 wenigstens das Aufblättern von Indizes möglich sei, sodass im OPAC ein Index für die vergebenen Notationen angeboten werden kann (bzw. mehrere solche Indizes bei Verwendung von mehr als nur einem Klassifikationssystem). Gewiss, doch was bringt dem Uneingeweihten das Aufblättern des Notationsindex - außer einer alphabetischen Liste von kryptischen Codes? Weiter könnte man einwenden, dass es im Aleph-500-OPAC die so genannten Suchdienste ("services") gibt, mithilfe derer von bestimmten Elementen einer Vollanzeige hypertextuell weiternavigiert werden kann. Richtig, doch damit kann man bloß wiederum den Index aufblättern oder alle anderen Werke anzeigen lassen, die dieselbe Notationen - also einen Code, dessen Bedeutung meist unbekannt ist - aufweisen. Wie populär mag dieses Feature beim Publikum wohl sein? Ein anderer Einwand wäre der Hinweis auf das inzwischen vom Hersteller angebotene Thesaurus-Modul, das vermutlich auch für Klassifikationssysteme eingesetzt werden könnte. Doch wie viele Bibliotheken unseres Verbundes waren bisher bereit, für dieses Modul, das man eigentlich als Bestandteil des Basissystems erwarten könnte, gesondert zu bezahlen? Schließlich mag man noch einwenden, dass es im Gegensatz zur Bibos-Zeit nun die Möglichkeit gibt, Systematiken und Klassifikationen als Normdateien zu implementieren und diese beim Retrieval für verbale Einstiege in die klassifikatorische Recherche oder zumindest für die Veranschaulichung der Klassenbenennungen in der Vollanzeige zu nutzen. Korrekt - dies ist möglich und wurde sogar einst für die MSC (Mathematics Subject Classification, auch bekannt als "AMS-Klassifikation") versucht. Dieses Projekt, das noch unter der Systemversion 11.5 begonnen wurde, geriet jedoch nach einiger Zeit ins Stocken und fand bedauerlicherweise nie seinen Weg in die folgende Version (14.2). Mag auch zu hoffen sein, dass es unter der neuen Version 16 wieder weitergeführt werden kann, so weist dieses Beispiel doch auf die grundsätzliche Problematik des Normdatei-Ansatzes (zusätzlicher Aufwand, Kontinuität) hin. Zudem lohnt sich die Implementierung einer eigenen Normdatei 4 wohl nur bei einem größeren bzw. komplexen Klassifikationssystem, wogegen man im Falle kleinerer Systematiken kaum daran denken würde.

Source

Mitteilungen der Vereinigung Österreichischer Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare. 58(2005) H.1, S.22-37

0.024485067 = product of:
  0.0734552 = sum of:
    0.0734552 = product of:
      0.1469104 = sum of:
        0.1469104 = weight(_text_:index in 157) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1469104 = score(doc=157,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21735094 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049739745 = queryNorm
            0.67591333 = fieldWeight in 157, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=157)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.020987201 = product of:
  0.0629616 = sum of:
    0.0629616 = product of:
      0.1259232 = sum of:
        0.1259232 = weight(_text_:index in 5571) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1259232 = score(doc=5571,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.21735094 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049739745 = queryNorm
            0.5793543 = fieldWeight in 5571, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5571)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

With the development during the last few years of the USMARC Format for Classification Data, the potential for improving call number browsing in online catalogs has increased dramatically. For example, it is now possible to create various types of indexes to classification numbers in the online catalog. Two types of possible indexes, a chain index and an index using Library of Congress subject headings as an index to the Library of Congress classification are discussed and examples given in appendices. It is also noted that these two indexes are only two of various forms an online index to classification numbers could take.

0.020024337 = product of:
  0.06007301 = sum of:
    0.06007301 = weight(_text_:sites in 3945) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06007301 = score(doc=3945,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.26002133 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.227637 = idf(docFreq=644, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049739745 = queryNorm
        0.23103109 = fieldWeight in 3945, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.227637 = idf(docFreq=644, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3945)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Purpose - This research project aims to provide a new visual representation of the Artefacts Canada digital collection, as well as a means for users to browse this content. Artefacts Canada Humanities is a database containing approximately 3.5 million records describing the different collections of Canadian museums. Design/methodology/approach - A four-step methodology was adopted for the development of the faceted taxonomy model. First, a best practice review consisting of an extensive analysis of existing terminology standards in museum communities and public web interfaces of large cultural organizations was performed. The second step of the methodology entailed a domain analysis; this involved extracting and comparing relevant concepts from terminological authoritative sources. The third step proceeded to term clustering and entity listing,which involved the breaking-up of the taxonomy domains into potential facets. An incremental user testing was also realized in order to validate and refine the taxonomy components (facets, values, and relationships). Findings - The project resulted in a bilingual and expandable vocabulary structure that will further be used to describe the Artefacts Canada database records. The new taxonomy simplifies the representation of complex content by grouping objects into similar facets to classify all records of the Artefacts Canada database. The user-friendly bilingual taxonomy provides worldwide visitors with the means to better access Canadian virtual museum collections. Originality/value - Few methodological tools are available for museums which wish to adopt a faceted approach in the development of their web sites. For practitioners, the methodology developed within this project is a direct contribution to support web site development of large cultural organizations.

0.017970797 = product of:
  0.05391239 = sum of:
    0.05391239 = product of:
      0.10782478 = sum of:
        0.10782478 = weight(_text_:22 in 7684) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10782478 = score(doc=7684,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1741801 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049739745 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 7684, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=7684)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Journal of academic librarianship. 10(1984), S.17-22

0.017489335 = product of:
  0.052468 = sum of:
    0.052468 = product of:
      0.104936 = sum of:
        0.104936 = weight(_text_:index in 3472) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.104936 = score(doc=3472,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21735094 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049739745 = queryNorm
            0.48279524 = fieldWeight in 3472, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3472)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.017489335 = product of:
  0.052468 = sum of:
    0.052468 = product of:
      0.104936 = sum of:
        0.104936 = weight(_text_:index in 3903) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.104936 = score(doc=3903,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21735094 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049739745 = queryNorm
            0.48279524 = fieldWeight in 3903, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3903)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Catalogue and index. 1992, nos.105/106, S.1,3-10

0.014840192 = product of:
  0.044520576 = sum of:
    0.044520576 = product of:
      0.08904115 = sum of:
        0.08904115 = weight(_text_:index in 2114) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08904115 = score(doc=2114,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.21735094 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049739745 = queryNorm
            0.40966535 = fieldWeight in 2114, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2114)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The last several years have seen the evolution of prototype systems exploiting the use of the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) as an interface to online catalogs. One such system, calles DORS (Dewy Online Retrieval System) was developed at the University of California, Los Angeles by the authors. The feature distinguishing this system is an automatically generated chain index, in particular the algorithms that were created for its automatic generation and the problems that were encountered. The problems were of three kinds: those that were overcome, but were not for lack of time and resources and those that we believe cannot be overcome. The paper concludes with suggestions for future resaerch and possible formatting changes to the DDC feature headings that would facilitate chain-index generation

0.013991467 = product of:
  0.0419744 = sum of:
    0.0419744 = product of:
      0.0839488 = sum of:
        0.0839488 = weight(_text_:index in 1155) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0839488 = score(doc=1155,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21735094 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049739745 = queryNorm
            0.3862362 = fieldWeight in 1155, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1155)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

A model system, the Dewey Online Retrieval System (DORS), was implemented as an interface to an online catalog for the purpose of experimenting with classification-based search strategies and generally seeking further understanding of the role of traditional classifications in automated information retrieval. Specifications for a classification retrieval interface were enumerated and rationalized and the system was developed in accordance with them. The feature that particularly distinguishes the system and enables it to meet its stated specifications is an automatically generated chain index

0.013991467 = product of:
  0.0419744 = sum of:
    0.0419744 = product of:
      0.0839488 = sum of:
        0.0839488 = weight(_text_:index in 5443) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0839488 = score(doc=5443,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21735094 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049739745 = queryNorm
            0.3862362 = fieldWeight in 5443, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5443)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Catalogue and index. 1998, no.127, S.5

0.013478097 = product of:
  0.04043429 = sum of:
    0.04043429 = product of:
      0.08086858 = sum of:
        0.08086858 = weight(_text_:22 in 6040) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08086858 = score(doc=6040,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1741801 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049739745 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6040, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6040)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 6.2002 19:42:47