Search (66 results, page 1 of 4)

0.05037638 = product of:
  0.14105387 = sum of:
    0.030006537 = weight(_text_:subject in 4066) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030006537 = score(doc=4066,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.27942157 = fieldWeight in 4066, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4066)
    0.03364573 = weight(_text_:classification in 4066) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03364573 = score(doc=4066,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.35186368 = fieldWeight in 4066, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4066)
    0.033585876 = product of:
      0.06717175 = sum of:
        0.06717175 = weight(_text_:schemes in 4066) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06717175 = score(doc=4066,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16067243 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.41806644 = fieldWeight in 4066, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4066)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.03364573 = weight(_text_:classification in 4066) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03364573 = score(doc=4066,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.35186368 = fieldWeight in 4066, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4066)
    0.010170003 = product of:
      0.020340007 = sum of:
        0.020340007 = weight(_text_:22 in 4066) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020340007 = score(doc=4066,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4066, 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=4066)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.35714287 = coord(5/14)

Abstract

The focus of this paper is the provision of terminology- and classification-based terminologies interoperability data via web services, initially using interoperability data based on the use of a Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) spine, but with an aim to explore other possibilities in time, including the use of other spines. The High-Level Thesaurus Project (HILT) Phase IV developed pilot web services based on SRW/U, SOAP, and SKOS to deliver machine-readable terminology and crossterminology mappings data likely to be useful to information services wishing to enhance their subject search or browse services. It also developed an associated toolkit to help information services technical staff to embed HILT-related functionality within service interfaces. Several UK information services have created illustrative user interface enhancements using HILT functionality and these will demonstrate what is possible. HILT currently has the following subject schemes mounted and available: DDC, CAB, GCMD, HASSET, IPSV, LCSH, MeSH, NMR, SCAS, UNESCO, and AAT. It also has high level mappings between some of these schemes and DDC and some deeper pilot mappings available.

Content

Teil von: Papers from Classification at a Crossroads: Multiple Directions to Usability: International UDC Seminar 2009-Part 2

Date

6. 1.2011 19:22:48

0.045787815 = product of:
  0.16025734 = sum of:
    0.044100422 = weight(_text_:subject in 1967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044100422 = score(doc=1967,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.41066417 = fieldWeight in 1967, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1967)
    0.049448926 = weight(_text_:classification in 1967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.049448926 = score(doc=1967,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.5171319 = fieldWeight in 1967, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1967)
    0.049448926 = weight(_text_:classification in 1967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.049448926 = score(doc=1967,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.5171319 = fieldWeight in 1967, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1967)
    0.017259069 = product of:
      0.034518138 = sum of:
        0.034518138 = weight(_text_:22 in 1967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034518138 = score(doc=1967,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 1967, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1967)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(4/14)

Abstract

This paper reports on the second part of an initiative of the authors on researching classification systems with the conceptual model defined by the Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD) final report. In an earlier study, the authors explored whether the FRSAD conceptual model could be extended beyond subject authority data to model classification data. The focus of the current study is to determine if classification data modeled using FRSAD can be used to solve real-world discovery problems in multicultural and multilingual contexts. The paper discusses the relationships between entities (same type or different types) in the context of classification systems that involve multiple translations and /or multicultural implementations. Results of two case studies are presented in detail: (a) two instances of the DDC (DDC 22 in English, and the Swedish-English mixed translation of DDC 22), and (b) Chinese Library Classification. The use cases of conceptual models in practice are also discussed.

Source

Beyond libraries - subject metadata in the digital environment and semantic web. IFLA Satellite Post-Conference, 17-18 August 2012, Tallinn

0.045715474 = product of:
  0.16000415 = sum of:
    0.042435654 = weight(_text_:subject in 3152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042435654 = score(doc=3152,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.39516178 = fieldWeight in 3152, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3152)
    0.03364573 = weight(_text_:classification in 3152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03364573 = score(doc=3152,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.35186368 = fieldWeight in 3152, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3152)
    0.05027704 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 3152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05027704 = score(doc=3152,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.43012467 = fieldWeight in 3152, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3152)
    0.03364573 = weight(_text_:classification in 3152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03364573 = score(doc=3152,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.35186368 = fieldWeight in 3152, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3152)
  0.2857143 = coord(4/14)

Series

IFLA series on bibliographic control; vol. 42

Source

Subject access: preparing for the future. Conference on August 20 - 21, 2009 in Florence, the IFLA Classification and Indexing Section sponsored an IFLA satellite conference entitled "Looking at the Past and Preparing for the Future". Eds.: P. Landry et al

0.041799262 = product of:
  0.14629741 = sum of:
    0.03675035 = weight(_text_:subject in 1962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03675035 = score(doc=1962,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.34222013 = fieldWeight in 1962, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1962)
    0.04758225 = weight(_text_:classification in 1962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04758225 = score(doc=1962,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.49761042 = fieldWeight in 1962, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1962)
    0.04758225 = weight(_text_:classification in 1962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04758225 = score(doc=1962,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.49761042 = fieldWeight in 1962, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1962)
    0.014382556 = product of:
      0.028765112 = sum of:
        0.028765112 = weight(_text_:22 in 1962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028765112 = score(doc=1962,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 1962, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1962)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(4/14)

Abstract

This article reports on the second part of an initiative of the authors on researching classification systems with the conceptual model defined by the Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD) final report. In an earlier study, the authors explored whether the FRSAD conceptual model could be extended beyond subject authority data to model classification data. The focus of the current study is to determine if classification data modeled using FRSAD can be used to solve real-world discovery problems in multicultural and multilingual contexts. The article discusses the relationships between entities (same type or different types) in the context of classification systems that involve multiple translations and/or multicultural implementations. Results of two case studies are presented in detail: (a) two instances of the Dewey Decimal Classification [DDC] (DDC 22 in English, and the Swedish-English mixed translation of DDC 22), and (b) Chinese Library Classification. The use cases of conceptual models in practice are also discussed.

Footnote

Contribution in a special issue "Beyond libraries: Subject metadata in the digital environment and Semantic Web" - Enthält Beiträge der gleichnamigen IFLA Satellite Post-Conference, 17-18 August 2012, Tallinn.

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 52(2014) no.1, S.90-101

0.041199524 = product of:
  0.14419833 = sum of:
    0.056933407 = weight(_text_:subject in 1802) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.056933407 = score(doc=1802,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.5301652 = fieldWeight in 1802, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1802)
    0.028549349 = weight(_text_:classification in 1802) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028549349 = score(doc=1802,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.29856625 = fieldWeight in 1802, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1802)
    0.030166224 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1802) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030166224 = score(doc=1802,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.2580748 = fieldWeight in 1802, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1802)
    0.028549349 = weight(_text_:classification in 1802) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028549349 = score(doc=1802,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.29856625 = fieldWeight in 1802, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1802)
  0.2857143 = coord(4/14)

Abstract

The German subject headings authority file - SWD - provides a terminologically controlled vocabulary, covering all fields of knowledge. The subject headings are determined by the German Rules for the Subject Catalogue. The authority file is produced and updated daily by participating libraries from around Germany, Austria and Switzerland. Over the last twenty years, it grew to an online-accessible database with about 550.000 headings. They are linked to other thesauri, also to French and English equivalents and with notations of the Dewey Decimal Classification. Thus, it allows multilingual access and searching in dispersed, heterogeneously indexed catalogues. The vocabulary is not only used for cataloguing library materials, but also web-resources and objects in archives and museums.

Series

IFLA series on bibliographic control; vol. 42

Source

Subject access: preparing for the future. Conference on August 20 - 21, 2009 in Florence, the IFLA Classification and Indexing Section sponsored an IFLA satellite conference entitled "Looking at the Past and Preparing for the Future". Eds.: P. Landry et al

0.035516314 = product of:
  0.124307096 = sum of:
    0.042009152 = weight(_text_:subject in 1805) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042009152 = score(doc=1805,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.3911902 = fieldWeight in 1805, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1805)
    0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1805) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023552012 = score(doc=1805,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1805, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1805)
    0.035193928 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1805) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.035193928 = score(doc=1805,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.30108726 = fieldWeight in 1805, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1805)
    0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1805) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023552012 = score(doc=1805,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1805, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1805)
  0.2857143 = coord(4/14)

Abstract

This paper describes the basic concepts of terminology services and their role in information retrieval interfaces. Terminology services are consumed by other software applications using machine-to-machine protocols, rather than directly by end-users. An example of a terminology service is the pilot developed by the High Level Thesaurus (HILT) project which has successfully demonstrated its potential for enhancing subject retrieval in operational services. Examples of enhancements in three such services are given. The paper discusses the future development of terminology services in relation to the Semantic Web.

Series

IFLA series on bibliographic control; vol. 42

Source

Subject access: preparing for the future. Conference on August 20 - 21, 2009 in Florence, the IFLA Classification and Indexing Section sponsored an IFLA satellite conference entitled "Looking at the Past and Preparing for the Future". Eds.: P. Landry et al

0.031378385 = product of:
  0.10982434 = sum of:
    0.044909675 = weight(_text_:subject in 4336) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044909675 = score(doc=4336,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.41819993 = fieldWeight in 4336, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4336)
    0.013458292 = weight(_text_:classification in 4336) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013458292 = score(doc=4336,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.14074548 = fieldWeight in 4336, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4336)
    0.03799808 = product of:
      0.07599616 = sum of:
        0.07599616 = weight(_text_:schemes in 4336) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07599616 = score(doc=4336,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.16067243 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.4729882 = fieldWeight in 4336, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4336)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.013458292 = weight(_text_:classification in 4336) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013458292 = score(doc=4336,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.14074548 = fieldWeight in 4336, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4336)
  0.2857143 = coord(4/14)

Abstract

The publication of library legacy includes publication of structuring vocabularies such as thesauri, classifications, subject headings. Different sources use different vocabularies, different in structure, width, depth and scope, and languages. Federated access to distributed data collections is currently possible if they rely on the same vocabularies. Mapping techniques and standards supporting them (such as SKOS mapping properties, OWL sameAs and equivalentClass) are still largely experimental, even in the linked data land. Libraries use a variety of controlled subject vocabulary and classification schemes to index items in their collections. Although most collections will employ only a single scheme, different schemes may be chosen to index different collections within a library or in separate libraries; schemes are chosen on the basis of language, subject focus (general or specific), granularity (specificity), user expectation, and availability and support (cost, currency, completeness, tools). For example, a typical academic library will operate separate metadata systems for the library's main collections, special collections (e.g. manuscripts, archives, audiovisual), digital collections, and one or more institutional repositories for teaching and research output; each of these systems may employ a different subject vocabulary, with little or no interoperability between terms and concepts. Users expect to have a single point-of-search in resource discovery services focussed on their local institutional collections. Librarians have to use complex and expensive resource discovery platforms to meet user expectations. Library communities continue to develop resource discovery services for consortia with a geographical, subject, sector (public, academic, school, special libraries), and/or domain (libraries, archives, museums) focus. Services are based on distributed searching (e.g. via Z39.50) or metadata aggregations (e.g. OCLC's WorldCat and OAISter). As a result, the number of different subject schemes encountered in such services is increasing. Trans-national consortia (e.g. Europeana) add to the complexity of the environment by including subject vocabularies in multiple languages. Users expect single point-of-search in consortial resource discovery service involving multiple organisations and large-scale metadata aggregations. Users also expect to be able to search for subjects using their own language and terms in an unambiguous, contextualised manner.

0.031247824 = product of:
  0.10936738 = sum of:
    0.051972847 = weight(_text_:subject in 4379) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.051972847 = score(doc=4379,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.48397237 = fieldWeight in 4379, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4379)
    0.016822865 = weight(_text_:classification in 4379) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016822865 = score(doc=4379,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 4379, 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=4379)
    0.0237488 = product of:
      0.0474976 = sum of:
        0.0474976 = weight(_text_:schemes in 4379) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0474976 = score(doc=4379,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16067243 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.2956176 = fieldWeight in 4379, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4379)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.016822865 = weight(_text_:classification in 4379) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016822865 = score(doc=4379,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 4379, 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=4379)
  0.2857143 = coord(4/14)

Abstract

While support for subject searching has been traditionally advocated for in library catalogs, often in the form of a catalog objective to find everything that a library has on a certain topic, research has shown that subject access has not been satisfactory. Many existing online catalogs and discovery services do not seem to make good use of the intellectual effort invested into assigning controlled subject index terms and classes. For example, few support hierarchical browsing of classification schemes and other controlled vocabularies with hierarchical structures, few provide end-user-friendly options to choose a more specific concept to increase precision, a broader concept or related concepts to increase recall, to disambiguate homonyms, or to find which term is best used to name a concept. Optimum subject access in library catalogs and discovery services is analyzed from the perspective of earlier research as well as contemporary conceptual models and cataloguing codes. Eighteen proposed features of what this should entail in practice are drawn. In an exploratory qualitative study, the three most common discovery services used in Swedish academic libraries are analyzed against these features. In line with previous research, subject access in contemporary interfaces is demonstrated to less than optimal. This is in spite of the fact that individual collections have been indexed with controlled vocabularies and a significant number of controlled vocabularies have been mapped to each other and are available in interoperable standards. Strategic action is proposed to build research-informed (inter)national standards and guidelines.

0.030741926 = product of:
  0.10759674 = sum of:
    0.02546139 = weight(_text_:subject in 4408) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02546139 = score(doc=4408,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.23709705 = fieldWeight in 4408, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4408)
    0.03496567 = weight(_text_:classification in 4408) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03496567 = score(doc=4408,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.3656675 = fieldWeight in 4408, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4408)
    0.03496567 = weight(_text_:classification in 4408) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03496567 = score(doc=4408,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.3656675 = fieldWeight in 4408, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4408)
    0.0122040035 = product of:
      0.024408007 = sum of:
        0.024408007 = weight(_text_:22 in 4408) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024408007 = score(doc=4408,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4408, 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=4408)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(4/14)

Abstract

Unser Projekt soll eine Kreuzkonkordanz zwischen den Universalklassifikationen wie der "Regensburger Verbundsklassifikation (RVK)" und der "Basisklassifikation (BK)" sowie den Fachklassifikationen "Mathematics Subject Classification (MSC2010)" und "Physics and Astronomy Classification Scheme (PACS2010)" in den Fachgebieten Mathematik und Physik herstellen. Fazit: "Die klassifikatorische Übereinstmmung zwischen Regensburger Verbundklassifikation und Physics and Astronomy Classification Scheme war in einzelnen Fachbereichen (z. B. Kernphysik) recht gut. Doch andere Fachbereiche (z.B. Polymerphysik, Mineralogie) stimmten sehr wenig überein. Insgesamt konnten wir 890 einfache Verbindungen erstellen. Mehrfachverbindungen wurden aus technischen Gründen nicht mitgezählt. Das Projekt war insgesamt sehr umfangreich, daher konnte es im Rahmen der zwanzig Projekttage nicht erschöpfend behandelt werden. Eine Weiterentwicklung, insbesondere hinsichtlich des kollektiven Zuganges in Form eines Webformulars und der automatischen Klassifizierung erscheint jedoch sinnvoll."

Pages

22 S

0.03063678 = product of:
  0.08578298 = sum of:
    0.02372225 = weight(_text_:subject in 3370) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02372225 = score(doc=3370,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.22090214 = fieldWeight in 3370, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3370)
    0.018808534 = weight(_text_:classification in 3370) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018808534 = score(doc=3370,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.19669779 = fieldWeight in 3370, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3370)
    0.0118744 = product of:
      0.0237488 = sum of:
        0.0237488 = weight(_text_:schemes in 3370) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0237488 = score(doc=3370,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16067243 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.1478088 = fieldWeight in 3370, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3370)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.01256926 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 3370) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01256926 = score(doc=3370,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.10753117 = fieldWeight in 3370, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3370)
    0.018808534 = weight(_text_:classification in 3370) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018808534 = score(doc=3370,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.19669779 = fieldWeight in 3370, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3370)
  0.35714287 = coord(5/14)

Content

"Last week, I received an email from Yulia Skora in Ukraine who is working on the mapping between UDC Summary and BBK (Bibliographic Library Classification) Summary. It reminded me of yet another challenging area of work. When responding to Yulia I realised that the issues with mapping, for instance, UDC Summary to Dewey Summaries [pdf] are often made more difficult because we have to deal with classification summaries in both systems and we cannot use a known exactMatch in many situations. In 2008, following advice received from colleagues in the HILT project, two of our colleagues quickly mapped 1000 classes of Dewey Summaries to UDC Master Reference File as a whole. This appeared to be relatively simple. The mapping in this case is simply an answer to a question "and how would you say e.g. Art metal work in UDC?" But when in 2009 we realised that we were going to release 2000 classes of UDC Summary as linked data, we decided to wait until we had our UDC Summary set defined and completed to be able to publish it mapped to the Dewey Summaries. As we arrived at this stage, little did we realise how much more complex the reversed mapping of UDC Summary to Dewey Summaries would turn out to be. Mapping the Dewey Summaries to UDC highlighted situations in which the logic and structure of two systems do not agree. Especially because Dewey tends to enumerate combinations of subject and attributes that do not always logically belong together. For instance, 850 Literatures of Italian, Sardinian, Dalmatian, Romanian, Rhaeto-Romanic languages Italian literature. This class mixes languages from three different subgroups of Romance languages. Italian and Sardinian belong to Italo Romance sub-family; Romanian and Dalmatian are Balkan Romance languages and Rhaeto Romance is the third subgroup that includes Friulian Ladin and Romanch. As UDC literature is based on a strict classification of language families, Dewey class 850 has to be mapped to 3 narrower UDC classes 821.131 Literature of Italo-Romance Languages , 821.132 Literature of Rhaeto-Romance languages and 821.135 Literature of Balkan-Romance Languages, or to a broader class 821.13 Literature of Romance languages. Hence we have to be sure that we have all these classes listed in the UDC Summary to be able to express UDC-DDC many-to-one, specific-to-broader relationships.
Another challenge appears when, e.g., mapping Dewey class 890 Literatures of other specific languages and language families, which does not make sense in UDC in which all languages and literatures have equal status. Standard UDC schedules do not have a selection of preferred literatures and other literatures. In principle, UDC does not allow classes entitled 'others' which do not have defined semantic content. If entities are subdivided and there is no provision for an item outside the listed subclasses then this item is subsumed to a top class or a broader class where all unspecifiied or general members of that class may be expected. If specification is needed this can be divised by adding an alphabetical extension to the broader class. Here we have to find and list in the UDC Summary all literatures that are 'unpreferred' i.e. lumped in the 890 classes and map them again as many-to-one specific-to-broader match. The example below illustrates another interesting case. Classes Dewey 061 and UDC 06 cover roughy the same semantic field but in the subdivision the Dewey Summaries lists a combination of subject and place and as an enumerative classification, provides ready made numbers for combinations of place that are most common in an average (American?) library. This is a frequent approach in the schemes created with the physical book arrangement, i.e. library schelves, in mind. UDC, designed as an indexing language for information retrieval, keeps subject and place in separate tables and allows for any concept of place such as, e.g. (7) North America to be used in combination with any subject as these may coincide in documents. Thus combinations such as Newspapers in North America, or Organizations in North America would not be offered as ready made combinations. There is no selection of 'preferred' or 'most needed countries' or languages or cultures in the standard UDC edition: <Tabelle>
If we map the Dewey Summaries to UDC in general and do not have to worry about a reverse relationship the situation is very simple as shown above. Mapping of UDC Summary to Dewey Summaries requires more thought. Firstly, UDC class (7) North America (common auxiliary of place) which simply represents the place has to be mapped to all occurences in which this place is 'built in' to the Dewey subjects: 063 Organization of North America 073 Journalism of North America 917 Geography of North America 970 History of North America 277 Christianity in North America 317 General Statistics in North America 557 Earth Sciences of North America The type of mapping from what is a general UDC concept of place (7) North America to a specific subject is clearly a broader-to-narrow match. Mapping of, for instance , UDC class 07 Newspapers. The press (includes journalism) to DDC class of 073 Journalim of North America is again broad-to-narrow match.
Precombined subjects, such as those shown above from Dewey, may be expressed in UDC Summary as examples of combination within various records. To express an exact match UDC class 07 has to contain example of combination 07(7) Journals. The Press - North America. In some cases we have, therefore, added examples to UDC Summary that represent exact match to Dewey Summaries. It is unfortunate that DDC has so many classes on the top level that deal with a selection of countries or languages that are given a preferred status in the scheme, and repeating these preferences in examples of combinations of UDC emulates an unwelcome cultural bias which we have to balance out somehow. This brings us to another challenge.. UDC 913(7) Regional Geography - North America [contains 2 concepts each of which has its URI] is an exact match to Dewey 917 [represented as one concept, 1 URI]. It seems that, because they represent an exact match to Dewey numbers, these UDC examples of combinations may also need a separate URIs so that they can be published as SKOS data. Albeit challenging, mapping proves to be a very useful exercise and I am looking forward to future work here especially in relation to our plans to map UDC Summary to Colon Classification. We are discussing this project with colleagues from DRTC in Bangalore (India)."

0.030442556 = product of:
  0.10654894 = sum of:
    0.036007844 = weight(_text_:subject in 4158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.036007844 = score(doc=4158,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.33530587 = fieldWeight in 4158, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4158)
    0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 4158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02018744 = score(doc=4158,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 4158, 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=4158)
    0.030166224 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 4158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030166224 = score(doc=4158,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.2580748 = fieldWeight in 4158, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4158)
    0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 4158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02018744 = score(doc=4158,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 4158, 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=4158)
  0.2857143 = coord(4/14)

Abstract

The treatment of subjects by Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) has attracted less attention than some of its other aspects, but there seems to be a general consensus that it needs work. While some have proposed elaborating its subject categories-concepts, objects, events, and places-to increase their semantic complexity, a working group of the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) has recently made a promising proposal that essentially bypasses those categories in favor of one entity, thema. This article gives an overview of the proposal and discusses its relevance to another difficult problem, ambiguities in the establishment of headings for buildings.Use of dynamic links from subject-based finding aids to records for electronic resources in the OPAC is suggested as one method for by-passing the OPAC search interface, thus making the library's electronic resources more accessible. This method simplifies maintenance of links to electronic resources and aids instruction by providing a single, consistent access point to them. Results of a usage study from before and after this project was completed show a consistent, often dramatic increase in use of the library's electronic resources.

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 48(2010) no.5, S.445-449

0.03032552 = product of:
  0.10613932 = sum of:
    0.02546139 = weight(_text_:subject in 4788) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02546139 = score(doc=4788,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.23709705 = fieldWeight in 4788, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4788)
    0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 4788) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02018744 = score(doc=4788,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 4788, 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=4788)
    0.040303055 = product of:
      0.08060611 = sum of:
        0.08060611 = weight(_text_:schemes in 4788) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08060611 = score(doc=4788,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16067243 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.5016798 = fieldWeight in 4788, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4788)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 4788) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02018744 = score(doc=4788,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 4788, 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=4788)
  0.2857143 = coord(4/14)

Abstract

In the last few years projects such as DESIRE, MACS, CrissCross and KoMoHe have demonstrated the benefits as well as the challenges of mapping between controlled vocabularies. Each project has taken a slightly different approach to the definition and implementation of appropriate types of mapping. The mapping types supported by SKOS are slightly different again. In an ideal world, all major databases would be interconnected; all widely used thesauri, classification schemes and subject heading schemes would map to each other; and all of us would use the same basic types of mapping to enable universal interoperability. Or would we? This paper will discuss the feasibility and desirability of agreeing and implementing standardized mapping types.

0.029894993 = product of:
  0.10463247 = sum of:
    0.021217827 = weight(_text_:subject in 305) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021217827 = score(doc=305,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.19758089 = fieldWeight in 305, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=305)
    0.029138058 = weight(_text_:classification in 305) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029138058 = score(doc=305,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.3047229 = fieldWeight in 305, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=305)
    0.02513852 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 305) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02513852 = score(doc=305,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.21506234 = fieldWeight in 305, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=305)
    0.029138058 = weight(_text_:classification in 305) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029138058 = score(doc=305,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.3047229 = fieldWeight in 305, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=305)
  0.2857143 = coord(4/14)

Abstract

This paper explores the history, uses cases, and future plans associated with availability of the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) system as linked data. Parts of the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) system have been available as linked data since 2009. Initial efforts included the DDC Summaries (the top three levels of the DDC) in eleven languages exposed as linked data in dewey.info. In 2010, the content of dewey.info was further extended by the addition of assignable numbers and captions from the Abridged Edition 14 data files in English, Italian, and Vietnamese. During 2012, we will add assignable numbers and captions from the latest full edition database, DDC 23. In addition to the "old friends" of different Dewey language versions, institutions such as the British Library and Deutsche Nationalbibliothek have made use of Dewey linked data in bibliographic records and authority files, and AGROVOC has linked to our data at a general level. We expect to extend our linked data network shortly to "new acquaintances" such as GeoNames, ISO 639-3 language codes, and Mathematics Subject Classification. In particular, we will examine the linking process to GeoNames as an example of cross-domain vocabulary alignment. In addition to linking plans, we report on use cases that facilitate machine-assisted categorization and support discovery in the Semantic Web environment.

0.02830489 = product of:
  0.09906711 = sum of:
    0.024005229 = weight(_text_:subject in 3965) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024005229 = score(doc=3965,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.22353725 = fieldWeight in 3965, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3965)
    0.023310447 = weight(_text_:classification in 3965) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023310447 = score(doc=3965,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24377833 = fieldWeight in 3965, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3965)
    0.028440988 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 3965) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028440988 = score(doc=3965,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24331525 = fieldWeight in 3965, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3965)
    0.023310447 = weight(_text_:classification in 3965) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023310447 = score(doc=3965,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24377833 = fieldWeight in 3965, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3965)
  0.2857143 = coord(4/14)

Abstract

This paper describes recent initiatives to make standard library metadata models and structures available to the Semantic Web, including IFLA standards such as Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR), Functional Requirements for Authority Data (FRAD), and International Standard Bibliographic Description (ISBD) along with the infrastructure that supports them. The FRBR Review Group is currently developing representations of FRAD and the entityrelationship model of FRBR in resource description framework (RDF) applications, using a combination of RDF, RDF Schema (RDFS), Simple Knowledge Organisation System (SKOS) and Web Ontology Language (OWL), cross-relating both models where appropriate. The ISBD/XML Task Group is investigating the representation of ISBD in RDF. The IFLA Namespaces project is developing an administrative and technical infrastructure to support such initiatives and encourage uptake of standards by other agencies. The paper describes similar initiatives with related external standards such as RDA - resource description and access, REICAT (the new Italian cataloguing rules) and CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model (CRM). The DCMI RDA Task Group is working with the Joint Steering Committee for RDA to develop Semantic Web representations of RDA structural elements, which are aligned with FRBR and FRAD, and controlled metadata content vocabularies. REICAT is also based on FRBR, and an object-oriented version of FRBR has been integrated with CRM, which itself has an RDF representation. CRM was initially based on the metadata needs of the museum community, and is now seeking extension to the archives community with the eventual aim of developing a model common to the main cultural information domains of archives, libraries and museums. The Vocabulary Mapping Framework (VMF) project has developed a Semantic Web tool to automatically generate mappings between metadata models from the information communities, including publishers. The tool is based on several standards, including CRM, FRAD, FRBR, MARC21 and RDA.
The paper discusses the importance of these initiatives in releasing as linked data the very large quantities of rich, professionally-generated metadata stored in formats based on these standards, such as UNIMARC and MARC21, addressing such issues as critical mass for semantic and statistical inferencing, integration with user- and machine-generated metadata, and authenticity, veracity and trust. The paper also discusses related initiatives to release controlled vocabularies, including the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), ISBD, Library of Congress Name Authority File (LCNAF), Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH), Rameau (French subject headings), Universal Decimal Classification (UDC), and the Virtual International Authority File (VIAF) as linked data. Finally, the paper discusses the potential collective impact of these initiatives on metadata workflows and management systems.

Content

Vortrag im Rahmen der Session 93. Cataloguing der WORLD LIBRARY AND INFORMATION CONGRESS: 76TH IFLA GENERAL CONFERENCE AND ASSEMBLY, 10-15 August 2010, Gothenburg, Sweden - 149. Information Technology, Cataloguing, Classification and Indexing with Knowledge Management

0.02693485 = product of:
  0.12569596 = sum of:
    0.07859193 = weight(_text_:subject in 1960) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07859193 = score(doc=1960,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.73184985 = fieldWeight in 1960, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1960)
    0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1960) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023552012 = score(doc=1960,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1960, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1960)
    0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1960) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023552012 = score(doc=1960,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1960, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1960)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

This book offers the first comprehensive exploration of the development and use of the International Federation of Library Association's newly released model for subject authority data, covering everything from the rationale for creating the model to practical steps for implementing it.

Footnote

Rez. in: Cataloging and classification quarterly 52(2014) no.3, S.343-346 (T. Brenndorfer)

LCSH

FRSAD (Conceptual model) / Subject headings

RSWK

Datenmodell / Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data
Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data / Inhaltserschließung

Subject

Datenmodell / Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data
Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data / Inhaltserschließung
FRSAD (Conceptual model) / Subject headings

0.023276636 = product of:
  0.1086243 = sum of:
    0.042009152 = weight(_text_:subject in 3874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042009152 = score(doc=3874,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.3911902 = fieldWeight in 3874, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3874)
    0.033307575 = weight(_text_:classification in 3874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033307575 = score(doc=3874,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.34832728 = fieldWeight in 3874, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3874)
    0.033307575 = weight(_text_:classification in 3874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033307575 = score(doc=3874,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.34832728 = fieldWeight in 3874, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3874)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

We take a small sample of works and compare how these are classified within both the Universal Decimal Classification and the Basic concepts Classification. We examine notational length, expressivity, network effects, and the number of subject strings. One key finding is that BCC typically synthesizes many more terms than UDC in classifying a particular document - but the length of classificatory notations is roughly equivalent for the two KOSs. BCC captures documents with fewer subject strings (generally one) but these are more complex.

0.022654418 = product of:
  0.10572062 = sum of:
    0.0474445 = weight(_text_:subject in 3870) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0474445 = score(doc=3870,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.4418043 = fieldWeight in 3870, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3870)
    0.029138058 = weight(_text_:classification in 3870) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029138058 = score(doc=3870,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.3047229 = fieldWeight in 3870, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3870)
    0.029138058 = weight(_text_:classification in 3870) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029138058 = score(doc=3870,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.3047229 = fieldWeight in 3870, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3870)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

Data from multiple knowledge organization systems are combined to provide a global overview of the content holdings of a small personal library. Subject headings and classification data are used to effectively map the combined book and topic space of the library. While harvested and manipulated by hand, the work reveals issues and potential solutions when using automated techniques to produce topic maps of much larger libraries. The small library visualized consists of the thirty-nine, digital, English language books found in the Osama Bin Laden (OBL) compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan upon his death. As this list of books has garnered considerable media attention, it is worth providing a visual overview of the subject content of these books - some of which is not readily apparent from the titles. Metadata from subject headings and classification numbers was combined to create book-subject maps. Tree maps of the classification data were also produced. The books contain 328 subject headings. In order to enhance the base map with meaningful thematic overlay, library holding count data was also harvested (and aggregated from duplicates). This additional data revealed the relative scarcity or popularity of individual books.

0.020441301 = product of:
  0.095392734 = sum of:
    0.02546139 = weight(_text_:subject in 2113) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02546139 = score(doc=2113,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.23709705 = fieldWeight in 2113, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2113)
    0.03496567 = weight(_text_:classification in 2113) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03496567 = score(doc=2113,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.3656675 = fieldWeight in 2113, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2113)
    0.03496567 = weight(_text_:classification in 2113) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03496567 = score(doc=2113,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.3656675 = fieldWeight in 2113, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2113)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

For some years mapping has been one of the main tasks in the EDUG member countries. While the ISO standard on mapping and interoperability with other vocabularies (ISO 25964-2) gives some advice on creating mappings between a thesaurus and e.g. a classification system, it does not deal with Dewey Decimal Classification specifically. The EDUG members have felt a growing need to discuss and record the knowledge acquired in mapping projects where either the source or the target vocabulary is DDC. The recommendations below are the result of a seminar on mapping in connection with the EDUG annual meeting in April 2015. The recommendations are not exhaustive and will be subject to change as EDUG members gain more experience in this field of work. We still hope that institutions planning to embark on a mapping project to/from DDC, may find the guidelines helpful.

0.020362813 = product of:
  0.09502646 = sum of:
    0.03675035 = weight(_text_:subject in 3944) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03675035 = score(doc=3944,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.34222013 = fieldWeight in 3944, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3944)
    0.029138058 = weight(_text_:classification in 3944) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029138058 = score(doc=3944,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.3047229 = fieldWeight in 3944, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3944)
    0.029138058 = weight(_text_:classification in 3944) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029138058 = score(doc=3944,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.3047229 = fieldWeight in 3944, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3944)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

Purpose - The paper aims to develop a prototype middleware framework between different terminology resources in order to provide a subject cross-browsing service for library portal systems. Design/methodology/approach - Nine terminology experts were interviewed to collect appropriate knowledge to support the development of a theoretical framework for the research. Based on this, a simplified software-based prototype system was constructed incorporating the knowledge acquired. The prototype involved mappings between the computer science schedule of the Dewey Decimal Classification (which acted as a spine) and two controlled vocabularies, UKAT and ACM Computing Classification. Subsequently, six further experts in the field were invited to evaluate the prototype system and provide feedback to improve the framework. Findings - The major findings showed that, given the large variety of terminology resources distributed throughout the web, the proposed middleware service is essential to integrate technically and semantically the different terminology resources in order to facilitate subject cross-browsing. A set of recommendations are also made, outlining the important approaches and features that support such a cross-browsing middleware service. Originality/value - Cross-browsing features are lacking in current library portal meta-search systems. Users are therefore deprived of this valuable retrieval provision. This research investigated the case for such a system and developed a prototype to fill this gap.

Object

ACM Computing Classification

0.017034415 = product of:
  0.07949394 = sum of:
    0.021217827 = weight(_text_:subject in 2251) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021217827 = score(doc=2251,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.19758089 = fieldWeight in 2251, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2251)
    0.029138058 = weight(_text_:classification in 2251) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029138058 = score(doc=2251,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.3047229 = fieldWeight in 2251, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2251)
    0.029138058 = weight(_text_:classification in 2251) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029138058 = score(doc=2251,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.3047229 = fieldWeight in 2251, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2251)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

In economics there exists an internationally established classification system. Research literature is usually classified according to the JEL classification codes, a classification system originated by the Journal of Economic Literature and published by the American Economic Association (AEA). Complementarily to keywords which are usually assigned freely, economists widely use the JEL codes when classifying their publications. In cooperation with KU Leuven, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics has published an unofficial multilingual version of JEL in SKOS format. In addition to this, exists the STW Thesaurus for Economics a bilingual domain-specific controlled vocabulary maintained by the German National Library of Economics (ZBW). Developed in the mid-1990s and since then constantly updated according to the current terminology usage in the latest international research literature in economics it covers all sub-fields both in the economics as well as in business economics and business practice containing subject headings which are clearly delimited from each other. It has been published on the web as Linked Open Data in the year 2009.