Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Theorie verbaler Dokumentationssprachen"
  • × language_ss:"f"
  1. Degez, D.: Compatibilité des langages d'indexation mariage, cohabitation ou fusion? : Quelques examples concrèts (1998) 0.05
    0.048214197 = product of:
      0.14464259 = sum of:
        0.14464259 = sum of:
          0.09752146 = weight(_text_:indexing in 2245) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.09752146 = score(doc=2245,freq=6.0), product of:
              0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                0.049684696 = queryNorm
              0.5127677 = fieldWeight in 2245, product of:
                2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                  6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2245)
          0.047121134 = weight(_text_:22 in 2245) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.047121134 = score(doc=2245,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.049684696 = queryNorm
              0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2245, 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=2245)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    To illustrate the theoretical analysis presented by J. Maniez published in Documentaliste 34(1997) nos.4/5 presents some concrete examples drawn for experience of the difficulties increasingly faced in trying to make different indexing languages compatible. Various types of problems may be considered: comparing semantic terms and relationships that compose indexing languages, setting standards for writing and vocabulary, and opposing pre and post coordinated descriptors. Proposes several solutions and discusses the need for further applied research in this area
    Date
    1. 8.1996 22:01:00
    Footnote
    Übers. d. Titels: Compatibility of indexing languages: fusion, marriage or just living together? Some concrete examples
  2. Maniez, J.: Fusion de banques de donnees documentaires at compatibilite des languages d'indexation (1997) 0.04
    0.041326456 = product of:
      0.12397936 = sum of:
        0.12397936 = sum of:
          0.083589815 = weight(_text_:indexing in 2246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.083589815 = score(doc=2246,freq=6.0), product of:
              0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                0.049684696 = queryNorm
              0.4395151 = fieldWeight in 2246, product of:
                2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                  6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2246)
          0.04038954 = weight(_text_:22 in 2246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.04038954 = score(doc=2246,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.049684696 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2246, 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=2246)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Discusses the apparently unattainable goal of compatibility of information languages. While controlled languages can improve retrieval performance within a single system, they make cooperation across different systems more difficult. The Internet and downloading accentuate this adverse outcome and the acceleration of data exchange aggravates the problem of compatibility. Defines this familiar concept and demonstrates that coherence is just as necessary as it was for indexing languages, the proliferation of which has created confusion in grouped data banks. Describes 2 types of potential solutions, similar to those applied to automatic translation of natural languages: - harmonizing the information languages themselves, both difficult and expensive, or, the more flexible solution involving automatic harmonization of indexing formulae based on pre established concordance tables. However, structural incompatibilities between post coordinated languages and classifications may lead any harmonization tools up a blind alley, while the paths of a universal concordance model are rare and narrow
    Date
    1. 8.1996 22:01:00
    Footnote
    Übers. d. Titels: Integration of information data banks and compatibility of indexing languages

Authors