Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × year_i:[2020 TO 2030}
  • × author_ss:"Broughton, V."
  1. Broughton, V.: Faceted classification in support of diversity : the role of concepts and terms in representing religion (2020) 0.02 
    0.017691448 = product of:
  0.08256009 = sum of:
    0.02546139 = weight(_text_:subject in 5992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02546139 = score(doc=5992,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.23709705 = fieldWeight in 5992, 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=5992)
    0.028549349 = weight(_text_:classification in 5992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028549349 = score(doc=5992,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.29856625 = fieldWeight in 5992, 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=5992)
    0.028549349 = weight(_text_:classification in 5992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028549349 = score(doc=5992,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.29856625 = fieldWeight in 5992, 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=5992)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    The paper examines the development of facet analysis as a methodology and the role it plays in building classifications and other knowledge-organization tools. The use of categorical analysis in areas other than library and information science is also considered. The suitability of the faceted approach for humanities documentation is explored through a critical description of the FATKS (Facet Analytical Theory in Managing Knowledge Structure for Humanities) project carried out at University College London. This research focused on building a conceptual model for the subject of religion together with a relational database and search-and-browse interfaces that would support some degree of automatic classification. The paper concludes with a discussion of the differences between the conceptual model and the vocabulary used to populate it, and how, in the case of religion, the choice of terminology can create an apparent bias in the system.
  2. Broughton, V.; Lomas, E.: irreconcilable diversity or a unity of purpose? : Philosophical foundations for the organization of religious knowledge (2020) 0.01 
    0.014758593 = product of:
  0.068873435 = sum of:
    0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 5994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02018744 = score(doc=5994,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 5994, 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=5994)
    0.02849856 = product of:
      0.05699712 = sum of:
        0.05699712 = weight(_text_:schemes in 5994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05699712 = score(doc=5994,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16067243 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.35474116 = fieldWeight in 5994, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5994)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 5994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02018744 = score(doc=5994,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 5994, 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=5994)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    We examine the way in which religion is managed in the major library classification schemes and in archival practice and how and why bias and misrepresentation occur. Broad definitions of what is meant by diversity and religious pluralism and why it is a cause for concern precede a discussion of the standard model of interreligious attitudes (exclusivism/inclusivism/pluralism) with particular reference to the philosophy of John Hick. This model is used as a lens through which to evaluate knowledge organization systems (KOSs) for evidence of comparable theoretical positions and to suggest a possible typology of religious KOSs. Archival and library practice are considered, and, despite their very different approaches, found to have some similarities in the way in which traditional societal structures have affected bias and misrepresentation of religious beliefs. There is, nevertheless, evidence of a general move towards a more pluralistic attitude to different faiths.
  3. Broughton, V.: Facet analysis : the evolution of an idea (2023) 0.01 
    0.013458293 = product of:
  0.09420805 = sum of:
    0.047104023 = weight(_text_:classification in 1164) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.047104023 = score(doc=1164,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.49260917 = fieldWeight in 1164, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1164)
    0.047104023 = weight(_text_:classification in 1164) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.047104023 = score(doc=1164,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.49260917 = fieldWeight in 1164, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1164)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    Facets are widely encountered in information and knowledge organization, but there is much disparity in the use and understanding of concepts such as "facet," "facet analysis," and "faceted classification." The paper traces the history of these ideas and how they have been employed in different contexts. What may be termed the classical school of faceted classification is given some prominence, through the ideas of Ranganathan and the Classification Research Group, but other interpretations are also explored. Attention is paid not only to the idea of what facet analysis is, and what purpose it serves, but also the language utilized to describe and explain it.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 61(2023) no.5-6, S.411-438

Types