-
Tennis, J.T.: Facets and fugit tempus : considering time's effect on faceted classification schemes (2012)
0.07
0.06872934 = product of:
0.13745868 = sum of:
0.13745868 = sum of:
0.0809506 = weight(_text_:classification in 826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0809506 = score(doc=826,freq=6.0), product of:
0.16603322 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.05213454 = queryNorm
0.48755667 = fieldWeight in 826, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=826)
0.056508083 = weight(_text_:22 in 826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056508083 = score(doc=826,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18256627 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05213454 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 826, 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=826)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Describes the effect of scheme change on the semantics in faceted classification. Two types of change are identified: ecological change and lexical change. Examples from different editions of the Colon Classification are used to illustrate change.
- Date
- 2. 6.2013 18:33:22
-
Tennis, J.T.: Load Bearing or Levittown? : the edifice metaphor in conceptualizing the ethos of classification work (2014)
0.06
0.060138173 = product of:
0.12027635 = sum of:
0.12027635 = sum of:
0.070831776 = weight(_text_:classification in 1426) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.070831776 = score(doc=1426,freq=6.0), product of:
0.16603322 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.05213454 = queryNorm
0.42661208 = fieldWeight in 1426, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1426)
0.04944457 = weight(_text_:22 in 1426) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04944457 = score(doc=1426,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18256627 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05213454 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1426, 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=1426)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This paper introduces the edifice metaphor. This metaphor accounts for the context of time and place when comparing the similarities and differences that obtain between classification schemes. It is argued that this metaphor helps call into question whether or not the contemporary received assumption that all classification is a universal constant.
- 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
-
Tennis, J.T.: Foundational, first-order, and second-order classification theory (2015)
0.03
0.026289476 = product of:
0.052578952 = sum of:
0.052578952 = product of:
0.105157904 = sum of:
0.105157904 = weight(_text_:classification in 2204) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.105157904 = score(doc=2204,freq=18.0), product of:
0.16603322 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.05213454 = queryNorm
0.6333546 = fieldWeight in 2204, product of:
4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
18.0 = termFreq=18.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2204)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Both basic and applied research on the construction, implementation, maintenance, and evaluation of classification schemes is called classification theory. If we employ Ritzer's metatheoretical method of analysis on the over one-hundred year-old body of literature, we can se categories of theory emerge. This paper looks at one particular part of knowledge organization work, namely classification theory, and asks 1) what are the contours of this intellectual space, and, 2) what have we produced in the theoretical reflection on constructing, implementing, and evaluating classification schemes? The preliminary findings from this work are that classification theory can be separated into three kinds: foundational classification theory, first-order classification theory, and second-order classification theory, each with its own concerns and objects of study.
-
Tennis, J.T.: Epistemology, theory, and methodology in knowledge organization : toward a classification, metatheory, and research framework (2008)
0.02
0.023368426 = product of:
0.04673685 = sum of:
0.04673685 = product of:
0.0934737 = sum of:
0.0934737 = weight(_text_:classification in 2132) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0934737 = score(doc=2132,freq=8.0), product of:
0.16603322 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.05213454 = queryNorm
0.5629819 = fieldWeight in 2132, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2132)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This paper proposes a preliminary classification of knowledge organization research, divided among epistemology, theory, and methodology plus three sphere of research: design, study, and critique. This work is situated in a metatheoretical framework, drawn from sociological thought. Example works are presented along with preliminary classification. The classification is then briefly described as a comparison tool which can be used to demonstrate overlap and divergence in cognate discourses of knowledge organization (such as ontology engineering).
-
Tennis, J.T.: Four orders of classification theory and their implications (2018)
0.02
0.023368426 = product of:
0.04673685 = sum of:
0.04673685 = product of:
0.0934737 = sum of:
0.0934737 = weight(_text_:classification in 5264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0934737 = score(doc=5264,freq=8.0), product of:
0.16603322 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.05213454 = queryNorm
0.5629819 = fieldWeight in 5264, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5264)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This article provides an interpretation of the structure of classification theory literature, from the late 19th Century to the present, by dividing it into four orders, and then describes the relationship between that and manuals for classification design.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 56(2018) no.8, S.702-710
-
Tennis, J.T.: Never facets alone : the evolving thought and persistent problems in Ranganathan's theories of classification (2017)
0.02
0.021907898 = product of:
0.043815795 = sum of:
0.043815795 = product of:
0.08763159 = sum of:
0.08763159 = weight(_text_:classification in 5800) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08763159 = score(doc=5800,freq=18.0), product of:
0.16603322 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.05213454 = queryNorm
0.5277955 = fieldWeight in 5800, product of:
4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
18.0 = termFreq=18.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5800)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Shiyali Ramamrita Ranganathan's theory of classification spans a number of works over a number of decades. And while he was devoted to solving many problems in the practice of librarianship, and is known as the father of library science in India (Garfield, 1984), his work in classification revolves around one central concern. His classification research addressed the problems that arose from introducing new ideas into a scheme for classification, while maintaining a meaningful hierarchical and systematically arranged order of classes. This is because hierarchical and systematically arranged classes are the defining characteristic of useful classification. To lose this order is to through the addition of new classes is to introduce confusion, if not chaos, and to move toward a useless classification - or at least one that requires complete revision. In the following chapter, I outline the stages, and the elements of those stages, in Ranganathan's thought on classification from 1926-1972, as well as posthumous work that continues his agenda. And while facets figure prominently in all of these stages; but for Ranganathan to achieve his goal, he must continually add to this central feature of his theory of classification. I will close this chapter with an outline of persistent problems that represent research fronts for the field. Chief among these are what to do about scheme change and the open question about the rigor of information modeling in light of semantic web developments.
-
Tennis, J.T.: ¬The strange case of eugenics : a subject's ontogeny in a long-lived classification scheme and the question of collocative integrity (2012)
0.02
0.02023765 = product of:
0.0404753 = sum of:
0.0404753 = product of:
0.0809506 = sum of:
0.0809506 = weight(_text_:classification in 275) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0809506 = score(doc=275,freq=6.0), product of:
0.16603322 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.05213454 = queryNorm
0.48755667 = fieldWeight in 275, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=275)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This article introduces the problem of collocative integrity present in long-lived classification schemes that undergo several changes. A case study of the subject "eugenics" in the Dewey Decimal Classification is presented to illustrate this phenomenon. Eugenics is strange because of the kinds of changes it undergoes. The article closes with a discussion of subject ontogeny as the name for this phenomenon and describes implications for information searching and browsing.
-
Tennis, J.T.: Measured time : imposing a temporal metric to classificatory structures
0.02
0.017707944 = product of:
0.035415888 = sum of:
0.035415888 = product of:
0.070831776 = sum of:
0.070831776 = weight(_text_:classification in 3529) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.070831776 = score(doc=3529,freq=6.0), product of:
0.16603322 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.05213454 = queryNorm
0.42661208 = fieldWeight in 3529, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3529)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Describes three units of time helpful for understanding and evaluating classificatory structures: long time (versions and states of classification schemes), short time (the act of indexing as repeated ritual or form), and micro-time (where stages of the interpretation process of indexing are separated out and inventoried). Concludes with a short discussion of how time and the impermanence of classification also conjures up an artistic conceptualization of indexing, and briefly uses that to question the seemingly dominant understanding of classification practice as outcome of scientific management and assembly line thought.
-
Tennis, J.T.: Experientialist epistemology and classification theory : embodied and dimensional classification (2005)
0.02
0.01752632 = product of:
0.03505264 = sum of:
0.03505264 = product of:
0.07010528 = sum of:
0.07010528 = weight(_text_:classification in 5038) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07010528 = score(doc=5038,freq=8.0), product of:
0.16603322 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.05213454 = queryNorm
0.42223644 = fieldWeight in 5038, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5038)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- What theoretical framework can help in building, maintaining and evaluating networked knowledge organization resources? Specifically, what theoretical framework makes sense of the semantic prowess of ontologies and peer-to-peer systems, and by extension aids in their building, maintenance, and evaluation? I posit that a theoretical work that weds both formal and associative (structurel and interpretive) aspects of knowledge organization systems provides that framework. Here I lay out the terms and the intellectual constructs that serve as the foundation for investigative work into experientialist classification theory, a theoretical framework of embodied, infrastructural, and reified knowledge organization. I build an the interpretive work of scholars in information studies, cognitive semantics, sociology, and science studies. With the terms and the framework in place, I then outline classification theory's critiques of classificatory structures. In order to address these critiques with an experientialist approach an experientialist semantics is offered as a design commitment for an example: metadata in peer-to-peer network knowledge organization structures.
-
Tennis, J.T.: Social tagging and the next steps for indexing (2006)
0.02
0.01752632 = product of:
0.03505264 = sum of:
0.03505264 = product of:
0.07010528 = sum of:
0.07010528 = weight(_text_:classification in 570) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07010528 = score(doc=570,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16603322 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.05213454 = queryNorm
0.42223644 = fieldWeight in 570, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=570)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Proceedings 17th SIG/CR Classification Research Workshop, November 4, 2006, Austin, Texas. Eds.: Jonathan Furner and Joseph T. Tennis
-
Tennis, J.T.: Structure of classification theory : on foundational and the higher layers of classification theory (2016)
0.02
0.016523972 = product of:
0.033047944 = sum of:
0.033047944 = product of:
0.06609589 = sum of:
0.06609589 = weight(_text_:classification in 4889) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06609589 = score(doc=4889,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16603322 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.05213454 = queryNorm
0.39808834 = fieldWeight in 4889, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4889)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Tennis, J.T.: Ethos and ideology of knowledge organization : toward precepts for an engaged knowledge organization (2013)
0.01
0.014127021 = product of:
0.028254041 = sum of:
0.028254041 = product of:
0.056508083 = sum of:
0.056508083 = weight(_text_:22 in 637) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056508083 = score(doc=637,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18256627 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05213454 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 637, 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=637)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 2.2013 11:54:49
-
Tennis, J.T.: Scheme versioning in the Semantic Web (2006)
0.01
0.011684213 = product of:
0.023368426 = sum of:
0.023368426 = product of:
0.04673685 = sum of:
0.04673685 = weight(_text_:classification in 4939) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04673685 = score(doc=4939,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16603322 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.05213454 = queryNorm
0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 4939, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4939)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 43(2006) nos.3/4, S.85-104
-
Tennis, J.T.: Is there a new bbliography? (2011)
0.01
0.011684213 = product of:
0.023368426 = sum of:
0.023368426 = product of:
0.04673685 = sum of:
0.04673685 = weight(_text_:classification in 1888) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04673685 = score(doc=1888,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16603322 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.05213454 = queryNorm
0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 1888, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1888)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 49(2011) no.2, S.121-126
-
Tennis, J.T.: Function, purpose, predication, and context of information organization frameworks (2006)
0.01
0.00876316 = product of:
0.01752632 = sum of:
0.01752632 = product of:
0.03505264 = sum of:
0.03505264 = weight(_text_:classification in 2520) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03505264 = score(doc=2520,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16603322 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.05213454 = queryNorm
0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 2520, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2520)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This paper outlines the purposes, predications, functions, and contexts of information organization frameworks; including: bibliographic control, information retrieval, resource discovery, resource description, open access scholarly indexing, personal information management protocols, and social tagging in order to compare and contrast those purposes, predications, functions, and contexts. Information organization frameworks, for the purpose of this paper, consist of information organization systems (classification schemes, taxonomies, ontologies, bibliographic descriptions, etc.), methods of conceiving of and creating the systems, and the work processes involved in maintaining these systems. The paper first outlines the theoretical literature of these information organization frameworks. In conclusion, this paper establishes the first part of an evaluation rubric for a function, predication, purpose, and context analysis.
-
Tennis, J.T.: Versioning concept schemes for persistent retrieval (2006)
0.01
0.008261986 = product of:
0.016523972 = sum of:
0.016523972 = product of:
0.033047944 = sum of:
0.033047944 = weight(_text_:classification in 1956) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033047944 = score(doc=1956,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16603322 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.05213454 = queryNorm
0.19904417 = fieldWeight in 1956, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1956)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Things change. Words change, meaning changes and use changes both words and meaning. In information access systems this means concept schemes such as thesauri or classification schemes change. They always have. Concept schemes that have survived have evolved over time, moving from one version, often called an edition, to the next. If we want to manage how words and meanings - and as a consequence use - change in an effective manner, and if we want to be able to search across versions of concept schemes, we have to track these changes. This paper explores how we might expand SKOS, a World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) draft recommendation in order to do that kind of tracking. The Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS) Core Guide is sponsored by the Semantic Web Best Practices and Deployment Working Group. The second draft, edited by Alistair Miles and Dan Brickley, was issued in November 2005. SKOS is a "model for expressing the basic structure and content of concept schemes such as thesauri, classification schemes, subject heading lists, taxonomies, folksonomies, other types of controlled vocabulary and also concept schemes embedded in glossaries and terminologies" in RDF. How SKOS handles version in concept schemes is an open issue. The current draft guide suggests using OWL and DCTERMS as mechanisms for concept scheme revision. As it stands an editor of a concept scheme can make notes or declare in OWL that more than one version exists. This paper adds to the SKOS Core by introducing a tracking system for changes in concept schemes. We call this tracking system vocabulary ontogeny. Ontogeny is a biological term for the development of an organism during its lifetime. Here we use the ontogeny metaphor to describe how vocabularies change over their lifetime. Our purpose here is to create a conceptual mechanism that will track these changes and in so doing enhance information retrieval and prevent document loss through versioning, thereby enabling persistent retrieval.
-
Hauser, E.; Tennis, J.T.: Episemantics: aboutness as aroundness (2019)
0.01
0.0073026326 = product of:
0.014605265 = sum of:
0.014605265 = product of:
0.02921053 = sum of:
0.02921053 = weight(_text_:classification in 5640) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02921053 = score(doc=5640,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16603322 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.05213454 = queryNorm
0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 5640, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5640)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Aboutness ranks amongst our field's greatest bugbears. What is a work about? How can this be known? This mirrors debates within the philosophy of language, where the concept of representation has similarly evaded satisfactory definition. This paper proposes that we abandon the strong sense of the word aboutness, which seems to promise some inherent relationship between work and subject, or, in philosophical terms, between word and world. Instead, we seek an etymological reset to the older sense of aboutness as "in the vicinity, nearby; in some place or various places nearby; all over a surface." To distinguish this sense in the context of information studies, we introduce the term episemantics. The authors have each independently applied this term in slightly different contexts and scales (Hauser 2018a; Tennis 2016), and this article presents a unified definition of the term and guidelines for applying it at the scale of both words and works. The resulting weak concept of aboutness is pragmatic, in Star's sense of a focus on consequences over antecedents, while reserving space for the critique and improvement of aboutness determinations within various contexts and research programs. The paper finishes with a discussion of the implication of the concept of episemantics and methodological possibilities it offers for knowledge organization research and practice. We draw inspiration from Melvil Dewey's use of physical aroundness in his first classification system and ask how aroundness might be more effectively operationalized in digital environments.
