Search (32 results, page 2 of 2)

0.010575616 = product of:
  0.052878078 = sum of:
    0.052878078 = weight(_text_:books in 3000) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.052878078 = score(doc=3000,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.21359414 = fieldWeight in 3000, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3000)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

This paper discusses the ontology of the document and questions whether or not our understanding of the concept of a document has changed now that more and more information is transmitted through increasingly digital means. Moreover, the argument is advanced that the identity of librarians is bound up with the future of the document. Not merely should librarians be changing their roles as a reaction to new technologies but they need to be proactive in embracing change and not in any way resisting it. The paper focuses on the theory of the ontology of documents. A number of ideas will be discussed including the thoughts of Michael Buckland in his seminal paper 'What is a Document' (1997), and further discussion will draw on the work of Michel Foucault (1972), Ludwig Wittgenstein (1958, 1969) and more recently Ziming Liu (2004) among others. Is the concept of a document essentially the same or has the transformation of document to e-document brought about a fundamental change in its nature. The paper goes on to discuss the more practical nature of documents and the role of the librarian. There follows a brief review of a range of types of document, including: E-journals, E-books, and considers the prospect that Extensible Markup Language (XML) offers a technological vehicle for the advent of an E-collection - this being an aggregation of different document mediums. The notion of the delivery of this information to the user (consumer) is then considered and with it the role of librarian. Waaijers (2002) has argued that a consequence of digitisation has brought with it issues of ownership and responsibility, and refers to XML as offering the possibility of "anatomising the internal structure of the document." In the concluding part to this paper some speculative thoughts are advanced on what might be possible outcomes regarding the changing perceptions of what a document might be. Could the Modern Librarian's identity and function be inextricably linked to the concept of the document? Finally it is suggested that further research to gather empirical evidence could involve a comparative study of the providers of information and the users of information focussing on their respective concepts of a document.

0.009715946 = product of:
  0.04857973 = sum of:
    0.04857973 = weight(_text_:22 in 114) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04857973 = score(doc=114,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17937298 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 114, 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=114)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.0083279535 = product of:
  0.041639768 = sum of:
    0.041639768 = weight(_text_:22 in 5507) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041639768 = score(doc=5507,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17937298 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5507, 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=5507)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

IFLA journal. 22(1996) no.2, S.121-127

0.0083279535 = product of:
  0.041639768 = sum of:
    0.041639768 = weight(_text_:22 in 5920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041639768 = score(doc=5920,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17937298 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5920, 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=5920)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

27. 5.2001 16:22:21

0.0083279535 = product of:
  0.041639768 = sum of:
    0.041639768 = weight(_text_:22 in 1385) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041639768 = score(doc=1385,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17937298 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1385, 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=1385)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 1.1996 18:26:45

0.006939962 = product of:
  0.03469981 = sum of:
    0.03469981 = weight(_text_:22 in 4312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03469981 = score(doc=4312,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17937298 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4312, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4312)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 6.2018 13:47:33

0.0068702116 = product of:
  0.03435106 = sum of:
    0.03435106 = weight(_text_:22 in 4066) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03435106 = score(doc=4066,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.17937298 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.19150631 = fieldWeight in 4066, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4066)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Content

Kommentare: "Keine leichte Lektüre, doch wer auf den Horizont blickt, kann diesen auch erweitern." (Thorsten Schäfer-Gümbel, vorwärts.de, Lesetipp von SPD Spitzenpolitikern, 15. August 2017) "Das beste Buch dieses Frühjahrs." (Thorsten Giersch, Carina Kontio, Handelsblatt online, 29. Juni 2017) "Ein Sachbuch, so anregend, dass man dazu tanzen möchte!" (Denis Scheck, ARD Druckfrisch, 2. Juli 2017) "A thoughtful look of what may be in store for humanity (...). It is a deeply engaging book with lots of stimulating ideas (...). It makes you think about the future, which is another way of saying it makes you think about the present." (Bill Gates, via Facebook, 4. Juni 2017) "Yuval Noah Harari's insights are compelling." (Paul Collier, TLS, 25. November 2016 ) "Challenging, readable and thought-provoking." (Bill Gates, Gates Notes, Bill Gates' Sommer-Buchtipps, 22. Mai 2017) "Man sollte alle Geschichtslehrer von Harari coachen lassen." (Christian Jostmann, Die Furche, 20. April 2017) "Vielleicht brauchen wir ja düstere Szenarien, wie Hararis Buch 'Homo Deus', um den Mut für neue Utopien zu finden." (Sven Waskönig, ARD ttt, 30. April 2017)
"In einer verblüffenden Tour d'Horizon durch die Menschheitsgeschichte beschreibt Harari, wie der Mensch in einem Akt wachsender Selbstermächtigung zum Homo Deus avanciert." (Adrian Lobe, Zeit Online, 10. April 2017) "(Harari) hat ein anmaßendes Buch geschrieben. Und ein aufregendes." (Erik Raidt, Stuttgarter Nachrichten Online, 31. März 2017) "Intelligent, scharfsinnig und manchmal sogar überraschend witzig (...) eröffnet einen ganz anderen Blick auf Geschichte." (Klaus Bittermann, taz literataz, 22. März 2017) "Überraschend, informativ, abwechslungsreich und leicht zu lesen." (Hildegard Lorenz, Münchner Merkur, 21. März 2017) "Sehen, wie die Welt ist, ohne auf die Bremse zu treten. Das ist der Sound von Yuval Noah Hararis 'Homo Deus'." (Adolf Holl, Die Presse, 18. März 2017) "Hararis packendes Buch ist ein Bekenntnis zum Humanismus." (Thomas Vasek, P.M., 10. März 2017) "Überaus anregende und fesselnde Lektüre." (Wolfgang Schneider, SWR2, 19. Februar 2017) "Fulminant, klug und düster." (Deutschlandradio Kultur, März 2017)

0.00660976 = product of:
  0.0330488 = sum of:
    0.0330488 = weight(_text_:books in 3273) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0330488 = score(doc=3273,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.13349634 = fieldWeight in 3273, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3273)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Content

"As a theoretical physicist based in Cambridge, I have lived my life in an extraordinarily privileged bubble. Cambridge is an unusual town, centered around one of the world's great universities. Within that town, the scientific community which I became part of in my twenties is even more rarefied. And within that scientific community, the small group of international theoretical physicists with whom I have spent my working life might sometimes be tempted to regard themselves as the pinnacle. Add to this, the celebrity that has come with my books, and the isolation imposed by my illness, I feel as though my ivory tower is getting taller. So the recent apparent rejection of the elite in both America and Britain is surely aimed at me, as much as anyone. Whatever we might think about the decision by the British electorate to reject membership of the European Union, and by the American public to embrace Donald Trump as their next President, there is no doubt in the minds of commentators that this was a cry of anger by people who felt that they had been abandoned by their leaders. It was, everyone seems to agree, the moment that the forgotten spoke, finding their voice to reject the advice and guidance of experts and the elite everywhere.

0.005551969 = product of:
  0.027759846 = sum of:
    0.027759846 = weight(_text_:22 in 5234) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027759846 = score(doc=5234,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17937298 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 5234, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5234)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 1.2018 11:33:49

0.0049072937 = product of:
  0.024536468 = sum of:
    0.024536468 = weight(_text_:22 in 524) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024536468 = score(doc=524,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.17937298 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.13679022 = fieldWeight in 524, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=524)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

26. 4.2002 11:22:22

0.004857973 = product of:
  0.024289865 = sum of:
    0.024289865 = weight(_text_:22 in 3556) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024289865 = score(doc=3556,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17937298 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 3556, 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=3556)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 7.2004 9:42:33

0.0041639768 = product of:
  0.020819884 = sum of:
    0.020819884 = weight(_text_:22 in 5745) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020819884 = score(doc=5745,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17937298 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 5745, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=5745)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Content

"Für Optimisten wie den amerikanischen Computerwissenschaftler Nicholas Negroponte bricht das kommende Digitalzeitalter wie eine Naturgewalt über uns herein. Als Zukunftsforscher kann ich jedoch nicht in den Tenor der üblichen kühnen Prophezeiungen der Medienbranche einstimmen. In Deutschland und den USA wird zwar viel über E-Commerce spekuliert. In Wirklichkeit nutzen aber die privaten Verbraucher dort Shopping, Reisebuchung und Bücherkauf per PC kaum (je unter 3 %), Hornebanking nur 5 % der Amerikaner und 3 % der Deutschen. Obwohl immer mehr Firmen online gehen, halten die Verbraucher weitgehend an ihren außerhäuslichen Konsumgewohnheiten fest. Bisher bietet das Netz gefühls- und erlebnismäßig einfach zu wenig. Auch 2010 werden über 90 % des privaten Verbrauchs nicht über OnlineGeschäfte getätigt. Selbst wenn sich der E-Commerce-Umsatz der privaten Verbraucher jährlich verdoppeln sollte, werden die Online-Geschäfte in Deutschland auch 2002 keine 3 % des Einzelhandelsumsatzes ausmachen (derzeit: 22 Milliarden Mark Einzelhandelsumsatz zu 2,5 Milliarden aus Online-Geschäften). Die Frage, warum Online-Shopping so wenig Resonanz findet, lässt sich auf folgende Ursachen zurückführen: Erlebniskonsum in den Shopping-Centern ist attraktiver; wachsende Ungeduld bei langem Laden der Website, Unzufriedenheit über verwirrend gestaltete Online-Shops, Enttäuschung über nicht verfügbare Produkte sowie Abbruch der Kaufabsicht, wenn das Shop-System abstürzt. Leider findet die digitale Revolution in Deutschland bisher fast nur auf Unternehmensseite statt, die Fragen nach den Bedürfnissen der Konsumenten bleiben weitgehend unbeantwortet.