Search (13 results, page 1 of 1)

0.045528244 = product of:
  0.09105649 = sum of:
    0.07161439 = weight(_text_:space in 5856) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07161439 = score(doc=5856,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24842183 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.2183776 = idf(docFreq=650, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047605187 = queryNorm
        0.28827736 = fieldWeight in 5856, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.2183776 = idf(docFreq=650, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5856)
    0.019442094 = product of:
      0.03888419 = sum of:
        0.03888419 = weight(_text_:model in 5856) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03888419 = score(doc=5856,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1830527 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.845226 = idf(docFreq=2569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047605187 = queryNorm
            0.21242073 = fieldWeight in 5856, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.845226 = idf(docFreq=2569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5856)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

The aim of control the economic, social and environmental aspects connected to the construction of a building imposes a systematic approach for which t is necessary to make test models aimed to a coordinate analysis of different and independent performance issues. BIM technology, referring to interoperable informative models, offers a significant operative basis to achieve this necessity. In most of the cases, informative models concentrate on a product-based digital models collection built in a virtual space, more than on the simulation of their relational behaviors. This relation, instead, is the most important aspect of modelling because it marks and characterizes the interactions that can define the building as a system. This study presents the use of standard classification systems as tools for both the activation and validation of an integrated performance-based building process. By referring categories and types of the informative model to the codes of a technological and performance-based classification system, it is possible to link and coordinate functional units and their elements with the indications required by the AEC standards. In this way, progressing with an incremental logic, it is possible to achieve the management of the requirements of the whole building and the monitoring of the fulfilment of design objectives and specific normative guidelines.

0.017903598 = product of:
  0.07161439 = sum of:
    0.07161439 = weight(_text_:space in 2952) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07161439 = score(doc=2952,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24842183 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.2183776 = idf(docFreq=650, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047605187 = queryNorm
        0.28827736 = fieldWeight in 2952, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.2183776 = idf(docFreq=650, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2952)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The Toolkit designed by the RDA Steering Committee makes Resource Description and Access available on the web, together with other useful documents (workflows, mappings, etc.). Reading, learning and memorizing are interconnected, and a working tool should make these activities faster and easier to perform. Some issues arise while verifying the real easiness of use and learning of the tool. The practical and formal requirements for a cataloguing code include plain language, ease of memorisation, clarity of instructions, familiarity for users, predictability and reproducibility of solutions, and general usability. From a formal point of view, the RDA text does not appear to be conceived for an uninterrupted reading, but just for reading of few paragraphs for temporary catalographic needs. From a content point of view, having a syndetic view of the description of a resource is rather difficult: catalographic details are scattered and their re-organization is not easy. The visualisation and logical organisation in the Toolkit could be improved: the table of contents occupies a sizable portion of the screen and resizing or hiding it is not easy; the indentation leaves little space to the words; inhomogeneous font styles (italic and bold) and poor contrast between background and text colours make reading not easy; simultaneous visualization of two or more parts of the text is not allowed; and Toolkit's icons are less intuitive than expected. In the conclusion, some suggestions on how to improve the Toolkit's aspects and usability are provided.

0.011287229 = product of:
  0.045148917 = sum of:
    0.045148917 = product of:
      0.09029783 = sum of:
        0.09029783 = weight(_text_:22 in 3477) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09029783 = score(doc=3477,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16670525 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047605187 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 3477, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3477)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.009721047 = product of:
  0.03888419 = sum of:
    0.03888419 = product of:
      0.07776838 = sum of:
        0.07776838 = weight(_text_:model in 3738) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07776838 = score(doc=3738,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1830527 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.845226 = idf(docFreq=2569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047605187 = queryNorm
            0.42484146 = fieldWeight in 3738, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.845226 = idf(docFreq=2569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3738)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

Übers. des Titels: A conceptual model for the new BNCF subject headings: subject indexing in the light of FRBR

0.007776838 = product of:
  0.031107351 = sum of:
    0.031107351 = product of:
      0.062214702 = sum of:
        0.062214702 = weight(_text_:model in 3117) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.062214702 = score(doc=3117,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1830527 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.845226 = idf(docFreq=2569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047605187 = queryNorm
            0.33987316 = fieldWeight in 3117, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.845226 = idf(docFreq=2569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3117)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Presents the basic ideas underlying fuzzy set theory, developed by Zadeh in the 1960s, which has important appplications in information retrieval and documentation. A fuzzy information retrieval system is much less restrictive that a Boolean model, since results can be arranged according to degree of similarity. Another application of the theory concerns the use of linguistic quantifiers; this type of solution is well adapted to retrieval systems designed for direct operation by end-users. Illustraes with examples fuzzy set algebra, operation, relationships, logic and reasoning

0.007776838 = product of:
  0.031107351 = sum of:
    0.031107351 = product of:
      0.062214702 = sum of:
        0.062214702 = weight(_text_:model in 992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.062214702 = score(doc=992,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1830527 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.845226 = idf(docFreq=2569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047605187 = queryNorm
            0.33987316 = fieldWeight in 992, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.845226 = idf(docFreq=2569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=992)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

In relation to indexing, one of the chief implications of cognitive epistemology is the necessity for redefining knowledge representation concepts for information filing and retrieval purposes. Such a redefinition involves abandoning the traditional, hierarchical, closed-structure classification model. Considers the following in detail: a semiotic critique of classification principles; Ranganathan's classification theory; Ranganathan and cognitive epistemology; and some reflections on the DDC and the Bliss Bibliographic Classification

0.0064498456 = product of:
  0.025799382 = sum of:
    0.025799382 = product of:
      0.051598765 = sum of:
        0.051598765 = weight(_text_:22 in 3053) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.051598765 = score(doc=3053,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16670525 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047605187 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3053, 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=3053)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

22. 2.1999 20:40:57

0.0058326283 = product of:
  0.023330513 = sum of:
    0.023330513 = product of:
      0.046661027 = sum of:
        0.046661027 = weight(_text_:model in 2950) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046661027 = score(doc=2950,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1830527 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.845226 = idf(docFreq=2569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047605187 = queryNorm
            0.25490487 = fieldWeight in 2950, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.845226 = idf(docFreq=2569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2950)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

RDA appears to be an hybrid standard: a list containing a high number of bibliographic elements and a rewrite - more formal than substantial - of cataloguing practices established with AACR2. In this document, RDA guidelines are analysed trying to compare them to the requirements of good cataloguing rules. Cataloguing rules in general shold not be an abstract and self-referential model but an effective tool to analyse and represent cultural phenomena, useful to qualified staff and helpful in learning about users need. From this point of view, RDA is quite disappointing: many relevant and frequent cataloguing issues are not mentioned at all, and cataloguing itself is left without real guidelines. A certain number of omissions, mistakes and individual flawness in the text should be modified by RDA board with a deep analysis of real cataloguing activities.

0.0056436146 = product of:
  0.022574458 = sum of:
    0.022574458 = product of:
      0.045148917 = sum of:
        0.045148917 = weight(_text_:22 in 3809) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045148917 = score(doc=3809,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16670525 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047605187 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3809, 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=3809)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

6. 4.1996 13:22:31

0.0056436146 = product of:
  0.022574458 = sum of:
    0.022574458 = product of:
      0.045148917 = sum of:
        0.045148917 = weight(_text_:22 in 4413) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045148917 = score(doc=4413,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16670525 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047605187 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4413, 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=4413)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

6. 4.1996 13:22:31

0.0056436146 = product of:
  0.022574458 = sum of:
    0.022574458 = product of:
      0.045148917 = sum of:
        0.045148917 = weight(_text_:22 in 2453) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045148917 = score(doc=2453,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16670525 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047605187 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2453, 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=2453)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

6. 4.1996 13:22:31

0.0056436146 = product of:
  0.022574458 = sum of:
    0.022574458 = product of:
      0.045148917 = sum of:
        0.045148917 = weight(_text_:22 in 2823) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045148917 = score(doc=2823,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16670525 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047605187 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2823, 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=2823)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

22. 2.1999 20:41:06

0.0019442094 = product of:
  0.007776838 = sum of:
    0.007776838 = product of:
      0.015553676 = sum of:
        0.015553676 = weight(_text_:model in 664) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015553676 = score(doc=664,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1830527 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.845226 = idf(docFreq=2569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047605187 = queryNorm
            0.08496829 = fieldWeight in 664, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.845226 = idf(docFreq=2569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=664)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

Now BNI is beginning to use the new language, pointing the way for the adoption of Nuovo soggettario in Italian libraries: a difficult challenge whose success is not assured. To name only one issue: including all fields of study requires particular care in treating terms with different specialized meanings; cooperation of other libraries and institutions is foreseen. At the same time, efforts are being made to assure the system's interoperability outside the library world. It is clear that a great commitment is required. "Too complex a system!" say the naysayers. "Only at the beginning," the proponents reply. The new system goes against the mainstream, compared with the imitation of the easy way offered by search engines - but we know that they must enrich their devices to improve quality, just repeating the work on semantic and syntactic relationships that leads formal expressions to the meanings they are intended to communicate - and also compared with research to create automated devices supporting human work, for the need to simplify cataloguing. Here AI is not involved, but automation is widely used to facilitate and to support the conscious work of indexers guided by rules as clear as possible. The advantage of Nuovo soggettario is its combination of a thesaurus (a much-appreciated tool used across the world) with the equally widespread technique of subject-string construction, which is to say: the rational and predictable combination of the terms used. The appearance of this original, unparalleled working model may well be a great occasion in the international development of indexing, as, on one hand, the Nuovo soggettario uses a recognized tool (the thesaurus) and, on the other, by permitting both pre-coordination and post-coordination, it attempts to overcome the fragmentation of increasingly complex and specialized subjects into isolated, single-term descriptors. This is a serious proposition that merits consideration from both theoretical and practical points of view - and outside Italy, too."