Search (81 results, page 1 of 5)

  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  • × theme_ss:"Klassifikationssysteme im Online-Retrieval"
  1. Satyapal, B.G.; Satyapal, N.S.: SATSAN AUTOMATRIX Version 1 : a computer programme for synthesis of Colon class number according to the postulational approach (2006) 0.03
    0.034813046 = product of:
      0.10443914 = sum of:
        0.015876798 = weight(_text_:of in 1492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015876798 = score(doc=1492,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.25915858 = fieldWeight in 1492, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1492)
        0.020439833 = weight(_text_:systems in 1492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020439833 = score(doc=1492,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.1697705 = fieldWeight in 1492, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1492)
        0.068122506 = weight(_text_:software in 1492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.068122506 = score(doc=1492,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.43831247 = fieldWeight in 1492, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1492)
      0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
    
    Abstract
    Describes the features und capabilities of the software SATSAN AUTOMATRIX version 1 for semi-automatic synthesis of Colon Class number (CCN) for a given subject according to the Postulational Approach formulated by S.R. Ranganathan. The present Auto-Matrix version l gives the user more facilities to carry out facet analysis of a subject (simple, compound. or complex) preparatory to synthesizing the corresponding CCN. The software also enables searching for and using previously constructed class numbers automatically, maintenance and use of databases of CC Index, facet formulae and CC schedules for subjects going with different Basic Subjects. The paper begins with a brief account of the authors' consultations with und directions received from. Prof A. Neelameghan in the course of developing the software. Oracle 8 and VB6 have been used in writing the programmes. But for operating SATSAN it is not necessary for users to he proficient in VB6 and Oracle 8 languages. Any computer literate with the basic knowledge of Microsoft Word will he able to use this application software.
    Source
    Knowledge organization, information systems and other essays: Professor A. Neelameghan Festschrift. Ed. by K.S. Raghavan and K.N. Prasad
  2. Broughton, V.; Lane, H.: Classification schemes revisited : applications to Web indexing and searching (2000) 0.03
    0.032143876 = product of:
      0.09643163 = sum of:
        0.041947264 = weight(_text_:applications in 2476) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041947264 = score(doc=2476,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.2432066 = fieldWeight in 2476, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2476)
        0.019081537 = weight(_text_:of in 2476) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019081537 = score(doc=2476,freq=26.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.31146988 = fieldWeight in 2476, product of:
              5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
                26.0 = termFreq=26.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2476)
        0.03540283 = weight(_text_:systems in 2476) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03540283 = score(doc=2476,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.29405114 = fieldWeight in 2476, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2476)
      0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
    
    Abstract
    Basic skills of classification and subject indexing have been little taught in British library schools since automation was introduced into libraries. However, development of the Internet as a major medium of publication has stretched the capability of search engines to cope with retrieval. Consequently, there has been interest in applying existing systems of knowledge organization to electronic resources. Unfortunately, the classification systems have been adopted without a full understanding of modern classification principles. Analytico-synthetic schemes have been used crudely, as in the case of the Universal Decimal Classification (UDC). The fully faceted Bliss Bibliographical Classification, 2nd edition (BC2) with its potential as a tool for electronic resource retrieval is virtually unknown outside academic libraries
    Content
    A short discussion of using classification systems to organize the web, one of many such. The authors are both involved with BC2 and naturally think it is the best system for organizing information online. They list reasons why faceted classifications are best (e.g. no theoretical limits to specificity or exhaustivity; easier to handle complex subjects; flexible enough to accommodate different user needs) and take a brief look at how BC2 works. They conclude with a discussion of how and why it should be applied to online resources, and a plea for recognition of the importance of classification and subject analysis skills, even when full-text searching is available and databases respond instantly.
    Source
    Journal of Internet cataloging. 2(2000) nos.3/4, S.143-155
  3. Doyle, B.: ¬The classification and evaluation of Content Management Systems (2003) 0.03
    0.02648557 = product of:
      0.07945671 = sum of:
        0.011975031 = weight(_text_:of in 2871) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011975031 = score(doc=2871,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.19546966 = fieldWeight in 2871, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2871)
        0.046250064 = weight(_text_:systems in 2871) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046250064 = score(doc=2871,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.38414678 = fieldWeight in 2871, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2871)
        0.021231614 = product of:
          0.042463228 = sum of:
            0.042463228 = weight(_text_:22 in 2871) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.042463228 = score(doc=2871,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03917671 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2871, 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=2871)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
    
    Abstract
    This is a report on how Doyle and others made a faceted classification scheme for content management systems and made it browsable on the web (see CMS Review in Example Web Sites, below). They discuss why they did it, how, their use of OPML and XFML, how they did research to find terms and categories, and they also include their taxonomy. It is interesting to see facets used in a business environment.
    Date
    30. 7.2004 12:22:52
  4. LaBarre, K.: Adventures in faceted classification: a brave new world or a world of confusion? (2004) 0.02
    0.023112813 = product of:
      0.104007654 = sum of:
        0.083051346 = weight(_text_:applications in 2634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.083051346 = score(doc=2634,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.4815245 = fieldWeight in 2634, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2634)
        0.020956306 = weight(_text_:of in 2634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020956306 = score(doc=2634,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.34207192 = fieldWeight in 2634, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2634)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    A preliminary, purposive survey of definitions and current applications of facet analytical theory (FA) is used to develop a framework for the analysis of Websites. This set of guidelines may well serve to highlight commonalities and differences among FA applications an the Web. Rather than identifying FA as the terrain of a particular interest group, the goal is to explore current practices, uncover common misconceptions, extend understanding, and highlight developments that augment the traditional practice of FA and faceted classification (FC).
    Source
    Knowledge organization and the global information society: Proceedings of the 8th International ISKO Conference 13-16 July 2004, London, UK. Ed.: I.C. McIlwaine
  5. Slavic, A.: On the nature and typology of documentary classifications and their use in a networked environment (2007) 0.02
    0.020537008 = product of:
      0.061611023 = sum of:
        0.010999769 = weight(_text_:of in 780) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010999769 = score(doc=780,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.17955035 = fieldWeight in 780, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=780)
        0.034687545 = weight(_text_:systems in 780) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034687545 = score(doc=780,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.28811008 = fieldWeight in 780, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=780)
        0.015923709 = product of:
          0.031847417 = sum of:
            0.031847417 = weight(_text_:22 in 780) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031847417 = score(doc=780,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03917671 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 780, 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=780)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
    
    Abstract
    Networked orientated standards for vocabulary publishing and exchange and proposals for terminological services and terminology registries will improve sharing and use of all knowledge organization systems in the networked information environment. This means that documentary classifications may also become more applicable for use outside their original domain of application. The paper summarises some characteristics common to documentary classifications and explains some terminological, functional and implementation aspects. The original purpose behind each classification scheme determines the functions that the vocabulary is designed to facilitate. These functions influence the structure, semantics and syntax, scheme coverage and format in which classification data are published and made available. The author suggests that attention should be paid to the differences between documentary classifications as these may determine their suitability for a certain purpose and may impose different requirements with respect to their use online. As we speak, many classifications are being created for knowledge organization and it may be important to promote expertise from the bibliographic domain with respect to building and using classification systems.
    Date
    22.12.2007 17:22:31
  6. Tunkelang, D.: Faceted search (2009) 0.02
    0.020370431 = product of:
      0.061111294 = sum of:
        0.03355781 = weight(_text_:applications in 26) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03355781 = score(doc=26,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.19456528 = fieldWeight in 26, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=26)
        0.011201616 = weight(_text_:of in 26) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011201616 = score(doc=26,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.18284513 = fieldWeight in 26, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=26)
        0.016351866 = weight(_text_:systems in 26) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016351866 = score(doc=26,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.1358164 = fieldWeight in 26, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=26)
      0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
    
    Abstract
    We live in an information age that requires us, more than ever, to represent, access, and use information. Over the last several decades, we have developed a modern science and technology for information retrieval, relentlessly pursuing the vision of a "memex" that Vannevar Bush proposed in his seminal article, "As We May Think." Faceted search plays a key role in this program. Faceted search addresses weaknesses of conventional search approaches and has emerged as a foundation for interactive information retrieval. User studies demonstrate that faceted search provides more effective information-seeking support to users than best-first search. Indeed, faceted search has become increasingly prevalent in online information access systems, particularly for e-commerce and site search. In this lecture, we explore the history, theory, and practice of faceted search. Although we cannot hope to be exhaustive, our aim is to provide sufficient depth and breadth to offer a useful resource to both researchers and practitioners. Because faceted search is an area of interest to computer scientists, information scientists, interface designers, and usability researchers, we do not assume that the reader is a specialist in any of these fields. Rather, we offer a self-contained treatment of the topic, with an extensive bibliography for those who would like to pursue particular aspects in more depth.
    Content
    Table of Contents: I. Key Concepts / Introduction: What Are Facets? / Information Retrieval / Faceted Information Retrieval / II. Research and Practice / Academic Research / Commercial Applications / III. Practical Concerns / Back-End Concerns / Front-End Concerns / Conclusion / Glossary
  7. Robbio, A. de; Maguolo, D.; Marini, A.: Scientific and general subject classifications in the digital world (2001) 0.02
    0.019814115 = product of:
      0.05944234 = sum of:
        0.015841477 = weight(_text_:of in 2) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015841477 = score(doc=2,freq=28.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.25858206 = fieldWeight in 2, product of:
              5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
                28.0 = termFreq=28.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2)
        0.016351866 = weight(_text_:systems in 2) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016351866 = score(doc=2,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.1358164 = fieldWeight in 2, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2)
        0.027249003 = weight(_text_:software in 2) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027249003 = score(doc=2,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.17532499 = fieldWeight in 2, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2)
      0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
    
    Abstract
    In the present work we discuss opportunities, problems, tools and techniques encountered when interconnecting discipline-specific subject classifications, primarily organized as search devices in bibliographic databases, with general classifications originally devised for book shelving in public libraries. We first state the fundamental distinction between topical (or subject) classifications and object classifications. Then we trace the structural limitations that have constrained subject classifications since their library origins, and the devices that were used to overcome the gap with genuine knowledge representation. After recalling some general notions on structure, dynamics and interferences of subject classifications and of the objects they refer to, we sketch a synthetic overview on discipline-specific classifications in Mathematics, Computing and Physics, on one hand, and on general classifications on the other. In this setting we present The Scientific Classifications Page, which collects groups of Web pages produced by a pool of software tools for developing hypertextual presentations of single or paired subject classifications from sequential source files, as well as facilities for gathering information from KWIC lists of classification descriptions. Further we propose a concept-oriented methodology for interconnecting subject classifications, with the concrete support of a relational analysis of the whole Mathematics Subject Classification through its evolution since 1959. Finally, we recall a very basic method for interconnection provided by coreference in bibliographic records among index elements from different systems, and point out the advantages of establishing the conditions of a more widespread application of such a method. A part of these contents was presented under the title Mathematics Subject Classification and related Classifications in the Digital World at the Eighth International Conference Crimea 2001, "Libraries and Associations in the Transient World: New Technologies and New Forms of Cooperation", Sudak, Ukraine, June 9-17, 2001, in a special session on electronic libraries, electronic publishing and electronic information in science chaired by Bernd Wegner, Editor-in-Chief of Zentralblatt MATH.
  8. Denton, W.: Putting facets on the Web : an annotated bibliography (2003) 0.02
    0.018478356 = product of:
      0.05543507 = sum of:
        0.010910287 = weight(_text_:of in 2467) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010910287 = score(doc=2467,freq=34.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.17808972 = fieldWeight in 2467, product of:
              5.8309517 = tf(freq=34.0), with freq of:
                34.0 = termFreq=34.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2467)
        0.020439833 = weight(_text_:systems in 2467) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020439833 = score(doc=2467,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.1697705 = fieldWeight in 2467, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2467)
        0.024084946 = weight(_text_:software in 2467) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024084946 = score(doc=2467,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.15496688 = fieldWeight in 2467, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2467)
      0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
    
    Abstract
    This is a classified, annotated bibliography about how to design faceted classification systems and make them usable on the World Wide Web. It is the first of three works I will be doing. The second, based on the material here and elsewhere, will discuss how to actually make the faceted system and put it online. The third will be a report of how I did just that, what worked, what didn't, and what I learned. Almost every article or book listed here begins with an explanation of what a faceted classification system is, so I won't (but see Steckel in Background below if you don't already know). They all agree that faceted systems are very appropriate for the web. Even pre-web articles (such as Duncan's in Background, below) assert that hypertext and facets will go together well. Combined, it is possible to take a set of documents and classify them or apply subject headings to describe what they are about, then build a navigational structure so that any user, no matter how he or she approaches the material, no matter what his or her goals, can move and search in a way that makes sense to them, but still get to the same useful results as someone else following a different path to the same goal. There is no one way that everyone will always use when looking for information. The more flexible the organization of the information, the more accommodating it is. Facets are more flexible for hypertext browsing than any enumerative or hierarchical system.
    Consider movie listings in newspapers. Most Canadian newspapers list movie showtimes in two large blocks, for the two major theatre chains. The listings are ordered by region (in large cities), then theatre, then movie, and finally by showtime. Anyone wondering where and when a particular movie is playing must scan the complete listings. Determining what movies are playing in the next half hour is very difficult. When movie listings went onto the web, most sites used a simple faceted organization, always with movie name and theatre, and perhaps with region or neighbourhood (thankfully, theatre chains were left out). They make it easy to pick a theatre and see what movies are playing there, or to pick a movie and see what theatres are showing it. To complete the system, the sites should allow users to browse by neighbourhood and showtime, and to order the results in any way they desired. Thus could people easily find answers to such questions as, "Where is the new James Bond movie playing?" "What's showing at the Roxy tonight?" "I'm going to be out in in Little Finland this afternoon with three hours to kill starting at 2 ... is anything interesting playing?" A hypertext, faceted classification system makes more useful information more easily available to the user. Reading the books and articles below in chronological order will show a certain progression: suggestions that faceting and hypertext might work well, confidence that facets would work well if only someone would make such a system, and finally the beginning of serious work on actually designing, building, and testing faceted web sites. There is a solid basis of how to make faceted classifications (see Vickery in Recommended), but their application online is just starting. Work on XFML (see Van Dijck's work in Recommended) the Exchangeable Faceted Metadata Language, will make this easier. If it follows previous patterns, parts of the Internet community will embrace the idea and make open source software available for others to reuse. It will be particularly beneficial if professionals in both information studies and computer science can work together to build working systems, standards, and code. Each can benefit from the other's expertise in what can be a very complicated and technical area. One particularly nice thing about this area of research is that people interested in combining facets and the web often have web sites where they post their writings.
    This bibliography is not meant to be exhaustive, but unfortunately it is not as complete as I wanted. Some books and articles are not be included, but they may be used in my future work. (These include two books and one article by B.C. Vickery: Faceted Classification Schemes (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers, 1966), Classification and Indexing in Science, 3rd ed. (London: Butterworths, 1975), and "Knowledge Representation: A Brief Review" (Journal of Documentation 42 no. 3 (September 1986): 145-159; and A.C. Foskett's "The Future of Faceted Classification" in The Future of Classification, edited by Rita Marcella and Arthur Maltby (Aldershot, England: Gower, 2000): 69-80). Nevertheless, I hope this bibliography will be useful for those both new to or familiar with faceted hypertext systems. Some very basic resources are listed, as well as some very advanced ones. Some example web sites are mentioned, but there is no detailed technical discussion of any software. The user interface to any web site is extremely important, and this is briefly mentioned in two or three places (for example the discussion of lawforwa.org (see Example Web Sites)). The larger question of how to display information graphically and with hypertext is outside the scope of this bibliography. There are five sections: Recommended, Background, Not Relevant, Example Web Sites, and Mailing Lists. Background material is either introductory, advanced, or of peripheral interest, and can be read after the Recommended resources if the reader wants to know more. The Not Relevant category contains articles that may appear in bibliographies but are not relevant for my purposes.
  9. Beagle, D.: Visualizing keyword distribution across multidisciplinary c-space (2003) 0.02
    0.018078228 = product of:
      0.054234684 = sum of:
        0.025168357 = weight(_text_:applications in 1202) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025168357 = score(doc=1202,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.14592396 = fieldWeight in 1202, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1202)
        0.016802425 = weight(_text_:of in 1202) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016802425 = score(doc=1202,freq=56.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.2742677 = fieldWeight in 1202, product of:
              7.483315 = tf(freq=56.0), with freq of:
                56.0 = termFreq=56.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1202)
        0.0122639 = weight(_text_:systems in 1202) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0122639 = score(doc=1202,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.1018623 = fieldWeight in 1202, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1202)
      0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
    
    Abstract
    The concept of c-space is proposed as a visualization schema relating containers of content to cataloging surrogates and classification structures. Possible applications of keyword vector clusters within c-space could include improved retrieval rates through the use of captioning within visual hierarchies, tracings of semantic bleeding among subclasses, and access to buried knowledge within subject-neutral publication containers. The Scholastica Project is described as one example, following a tradition of research dating back to the 1980's. Preliminary focus group assessment indicates that this type of classification rendering may offer digital library searchers enriched entry strategies and an expanded range of re-entry vocabularies. Those of us who work in traditional libraries typically assume that our systems of classification: Library of Congress Classification (LCC) and Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), are descriptive rather than prescriptive. In other words, LCC classes and subclasses approximate natural groupings of texts that reflect an underlying order of knowledge, rather than arbitrary categories prescribed by librarians to facilitate efficient shelving. Philosophical support for this assumption has traditionally been found in a number of places, from the archetypal tree of knowledge, to Aristotelian categories, to the concept of discursive formations proposed by Michel Foucault. Gary P. Radford has elegantly described an encounter with Foucault's discursive formations in the traditional library setting: "Just by looking at the titles on the spines, you can see how the books cluster together...You can identify those books that seem to form the heart of the discursive formation and those books that reside on the margins. Moving along the shelves, you see those books that tend to bleed over into other classifications and that straddle multiple discursive formations. You can physically and sensually experience...those points that feel like state borders or national boundaries, those points where one subject ends and another begins, or those magical places where one subject has morphed into another..."
    But what happens to this awareness in a digital library? Can discursive formations be represented in cyberspace, perhaps through diagrams in a visualization interface? And would such a schema be helpful to a digital library user? To approach this question, it is worth taking a moment to reconsider what Radford is looking at. First, he looks at titles to see how the books cluster. To illustrate, I scanned one hundred books on the shelves of a college library under subclass HT 101-395, defined by the LCC subclass caption as Urban groups. The City. Urban sociology. Of the first 100 titles in this sequence, fifty included the word "urban" or variants (e.g. "urbanization"). Another thirty-five used the word "city" or variants. These keywords appear to mark their titles as the heart of this discursive formation. The scattering of titles not using "urban" or "city" used related terms such as "town," "community," or in one case "skyscrapers." So we immediately see some empirical correlation between keywords and classification. But we also see a problem with the commonly used search technique of title-keyword. A student interested in urban studies will want to know about this entire subclass, and may wish to browse every title available therein. A title-keyword search on "urban" will retrieve only half of the titles, while a search on "city" will retrieve just over a third. There will be no overlap, since no titles in this sample contain both words. The only place where both words appear in a common string is in the LCC subclass caption, but captions are not typically indexed in library Online Public Access Catalogs (OPACs). In a traditional library, this problem is mitigated when the student goes to the shelf looking for any one of the books and suddenly discovers a much wider selection than the keyword search had led him to expect. But in a digital library, the issue of non-retrieval can be more problematic, as studies have indicated. Micco and Popp reported that, in a study funded partly by the U.S. Department of Education, 65 of 73 unskilled users searching for material on U.S./Soviet foreign relations found some material but never realized they had missed a large percentage of what was in the database.
  10. Quick Guide to Publishing a Classification Scheme on the Semantic Web (2008) 0.02
    0.015902052 = product of:
      0.071559235 = sum of:
        0.05872617 = weight(_text_:applications in 3061) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05872617 = score(doc=3061,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.34048924 = fieldWeight in 3061, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3061)
        0.0128330635 = weight(_text_:of in 3061) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0128330635 = score(doc=3061,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.20947541 = fieldWeight in 3061, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3061)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    This document describes in brief how to express the content and structure of a classification scheme, and metadata about a classification scheme, in RDF using the SKOS vocabulary. RDF allows data to be linked to and/or merged with other RDF data by semantic web applications. The Semantic Web, which is based on the Resource Description Framework (RDF), provides a common framework that allows data to be shared and reused across application, enterprise, and community boundaries. Publishing classifications schemes in SKOS will unify the great many of existing classification efforts in the framework of the Semantic Web.
  11. National Seminar on Classification in the Digital Environment : Papers contributed to the National Seminar an Classification in the Digital Environment, Bangalore, 9-11 August 2001 (2001) 0.02
    0.015590318 = product of:
      0.046770953 = sum of:
        0.016935252 = weight(_text_:of in 2047) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016935252 = score(doc=2047,freq=128.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.27643585 = fieldWeight in 2047, product of:
              11.313708 = tf(freq=128.0), with freq of:
                128.0 = termFreq=128.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2047)
        0.0245278 = weight(_text_:systems in 2047) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0245278 = score(doc=2047,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.2037246 = fieldWeight in 2047, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2047)
        0.0053079035 = product of:
          0.010615807 = sum of:
            0.010615807 = weight(_text_:22 in 2047) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.010615807 = score(doc=2047,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03917671 = queryNorm
                0.07738023 = fieldWeight in 2047, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2047)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
    
    Date
    2. 1.2004 10:35:22
    Footnote
    Rez. in: Knowledge organization 30(2003) no.1, S.40-42 (J.-E. Mai): "Introduction: This is a collection of papers presented at the National Seminar an Classification in the Digital Environment held in Bangalore, India, an August 9-11 2001. The collection contains 18 papers dealing with various issues related to knowledge organization and classification theory. The issue of transferring the knowledge, traditions, and theories of bibliographic classification to the digital environment is an important one, and I was excited to learn that proceedings from this seminar were available. Many of us experience frustration an a daily basis due to poorly constructed Web search mechanisms and Web directories. As a community devoted to making information easily accessible we have something to offer the Web community and a seminar an the topic was indeed much needed. Below are brief summaries of the 18 papers presented at the seminar. The order of the summaries follows the order of the papers in the proceedings. The titles of the paper are given in parentheses after the author's name. AHUJA and WESLEY (From "Subject" to "Need": Shift in Approach to Classifying Information an the Internet/Web) argue that traditional bibliographic classification systems fall in the digital environment. One problem is that bibliographic classification systems have been developed to organize library books an shelves and as such are unidimensional and tied to the paper-based environment. Another problem is that they are "subject" oriented in the sense that they assume a relatively stable universe of knowledge containing basic and fixed compartments of knowledge that can be identified and represented. Ahuja and Wesley suggest that classification in the digital environment should be need-oriented instead of subjectoriented ("One important link that binds knowledge and human being is his societal need. ... Hence, it will be ideal to organise knowledge based upon need instead of subject." (p. 10)).
    AHUJA and SATIJA (Relevance of Ranganathan's Classification Theory in the Age of Digital Libraries) note that traditional bibliographic classification systems have been applied in the digital environment with only limited success. They find that the "inherent flexibility of electronic manipulation of documents or their surrogates should allow a more organic approach to allocation of new subjects and appropriate linkages between subject hierarchies." (p. 18). Ahija and Satija also suggest that it is necessary to shift from a "subject" focus to a "need" focus when applying classification theory in the digital environment. They find Ranganathan's framework applicable in the digital environment. Although Ranganathan's focus is "subject oriented and hence emphasise the hierarchical and linear relationships" (p. 26), his framework "can be successfully adopted with certain modifications ... in the digital environment." (p. 26). SHAH and KUMAR (Model for System Unification of Geographical Schedules (Space Isolates)) report an a plan to develop a single schedule for geographical Subdivision that could be used across all classification systems. The authors argue that this is needed in order to facilitate interoperability in the digital environment. SAN SEGUNDO MANUEL (The Representation of Knowledge as a Symbolization of Productive Electronic Information) distills different approaches and definitions of the term "representation" as it relates to representation of knowledge in the library and information science literature and field. SHARADA (Linguistic and Document Classification: Paradigmatic Merger Possibilities) suggests the development of a universal indexing language. The foundation for the universal indexing language is Chomsky's Minimalist Program and Ranganathan's analytico-synthetic classification theory; Acording to the author, based an these approaches, it "should not be a problem" (p. 62) to develop a universal indexing language.
    SELVI (Knowledge Classification of Digital Information Materials with Special Reference to Clustering Technique) finds that it is essential to classify digital material since the amount of material that is becoming available is growing. Selvi suggests using automated classification to "group together those digital information materials or documents that are "most similar" (p. 65). This can be attained by using Cluster analysis methods. PRADHAN and THULASI (A Study of the Use of Classification and Indexing Systems by Web Resource Directories) compare and contrast the classificatory structures of Google, Yahoo, and Looksmart's directories and compare the directories to Dewey Decimal Classification, Library of Congress Classification and Colon Classification's classificatory structures. They find differentes between the directories' and the bibliographic classification systems' classificatory structures and principles. These differentes stem from the fact that bibliographic classification systems are used to "classify academic resources for the research community" (p. 83) and directories "aim to categorize a wider breath of information groups, entertainment, recreation, govt. information, commercial information" (p. 83). NEELAMEGHAN (Hierarchy, Hierarchical Relation and Hierarchical Arrangement) reviews the concept of hierarchy and the formation of hierarchical structures across a variety of domains. NEELAMEGHAN and PRADAD (Digitized Schemes for Subject Classification and Thesauri: Complementary Roles) demonstrate how thesaural relationships (NT, BT, and RT) can be applied to a classification scheme, the Colon Classification in this Gase. NEELAMEGHAN and ASUNDI (Metadata Framework for Describing Embodied Knowledge and Subject Content) propose to use the Generalized Facet Structure framework which is based an Ranganathan's General Theory of Knowledge Classification as a framework for describing the content of documents in a metadata element set for the representation of web documents. CHUDAMANI (Classified Catalogue as a Tool for Subject Based Information Retrieval in both Traditional and Electronic Library Environment) explains why the classified catalogue is superior to the alphabetic cata logue and argues that the same is true in the digital environment.
    PARAMESWARAN (Classification and Indexing: Impact of Classification Theory an PRECIS) reviews the PRECIS system and finds that "it Gould not escape from the impact of the theory of classification" (p. 131). The author further argues that the purpose of classification and subject indexing is the same and that both approaches depends an syntax. This leads to the conclusion that "there is an absolute syntax as the Indian theory of classification points out" (p. 131). SATYAPAL and SANJIVINI SATYAPAL (Classifying Documents According to Postulational Approach: 1. SA TSAN- A Computer Based Learning Package) and SATYAPAL and SANJIVINI SATYAPAL (Classifying Documents According to Postulational Approach: 2. Semi-Automatic Synthesis of CC Numbers) present an application to automate classification using a facet classification system, in this Gase, the Colon Classification system. GAIKAIWARI (An Interactive Application for Faceted Classification Systems) presents an application, called SRR, for managing and using a faceted classification scheme in a digital environment. IYER (Use of Instructional Technology to Support Traditional Classroom Learning: A Case Study) describes a course an "Information and Knowledge Organization" that she teaches at the University at Albany (SUNY). The course is a conceptual course that introduces the student to various aspects of knowledge organization. GOPINATH (Universal Classification: How can it be used?) lists fifteen uses of universal classifications and discusses the entities of a number of disciplines. GOPINATH (Knowledge Classification: The Theory of Classification) briefly reviews the foundations for research in automatic classification, summarizes the history of classification, and places Ranganathan's thought in the history of classification.
    Discussion The proceedings of the National Seminar an Classification in the Digital Environment give some insights. However, the depth of analysis and discussion is very uneven across the papers. Some of the papers have substantive research content while others appear to be notes used in the oral presentation. The treatments of the topics are very general in nature. Some papers have a very limited list of references while others have no bibliography. No index has been provided. The transfer of bibliographic knowledge organization theory to the digital environment is an important topic. However, as the papers at this conference have shown, it is also a difficult task. Of the 18 papers presented at this seminar an classification in the digital environment, only 4-5 papers actually deal directly with this important topic. The remaining papers deal with issues that are more or less relevant to classification in the digital environment without explicitly discussing the relation. The reason could be that the authors take up issues in knowledge organization that still need to be investigated and clarified before their application in the digital environment can be considered. Nonetheless, one wishes that the knowledge organization community would discuss the application of classification theory in the digital environment in greater detail. It is obvious from the comparisons of the classificatory structures of bibliographic classification systems and Web directories that these are different and that they probably should be different, since they serve different purposes. Interesting questions in the transformation of bibliographic classification theories to the digital environment are: "Given the existing principles in bibliographic knowledge organization, what are the optimum principles for organization of information, irrespectively of context?" and "What are the fundamental theoretical and practical principles for the construction of Web directories?" Unfortunately, the papers presented at this seminar do not attempt to answer or discuss these questions."
  12. Slavic, A.; Cordeiro, M.I.: Core requirements for automation of analytico-synthetic classifications (2004) 0.02
    0.015581901 = product of:
      0.070118554 = sum of:
        0.021062955 = weight(_text_:of in 2651) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021062955 = score(doc=2651,freq=22.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.34381276 = fieldWeight in 2651, product of:
              4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
                22.0 = termFreq=22.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2651)
        0.0490556 = weight(_text_:systems in 2651) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0490556 = score(doc=2651,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.4074492 = fieldWeight in 2651, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2651)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    The paper analyses the importance of data presentation and modelling and its role in improving the management, use and exchange of analytico-synthetic classifications in automated systems. Inefficiencies, in this respect, hinder the automation of classification systems that offer the possibility of building compound index/search terms. The lack of machine readable data expressing the semantics and structure of a classification vocabulary has negative effects on information management and retrieval, thus restricting the potential of both automated systems and classifications themselves. The authors analysed the data representation structure of three general analytico-synthetic classification systems (BC2-Bliss Bibliographic Classification; BSO-Broad System of Ordering; UDC-Universal Decimal Classification) and put forward some core requirements for classification data representation
    Source
    Knowledge organization and the global information society: Proceedings of the 8th International ISKO Conference 13-16 July 2004, London, UK. Ed.: I.C. McIlwaine
  13. Sparck Jones, K.: Revisiting classification for retrieval (2005) 0.02
    0.015378739 = product of:
      0.06920432 = sum of:
        0.05872617 = weight(_text_:applications in 4328) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05872617 = score(doc=4328,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.34048924 = fieldWeight in 4328, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4328)
        0.010478153 = weight(_text_:of in 4328) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010478153 = score(doc=4328,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.17103596 = fieldWeight in 4328, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4328)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - This short note seeks to respond to Hjørland and Pederson's paper "A substantive theory of classification for information retrieval" which starts from Sparck Jones's, "Some thoughts on classification for retrieval", originally published in 1970. Design/methodology/approach - The note comments on the context in which the 1970 paper was written, and on Hjørland and Pedersen's views, emphasising the need for well-grounded classification theory and application. Findings - The note maintains that text-based, a posteriori, classification, as increasingly found in applications, is likely to be more useful, in general, than a priori classification. Originality/value - The note elaborates on points made in a well-received earlier paper.
    Source
    Journal of documentation. 61(2005) no.5, S.598-601
  14. Koch, T.: ¬Az internetforrasok toketesebb leirasahoz, szervezesehez es keresesehez alkalmas oszatlyozasi rendszerek hasznalata (2000) 0.01
    0.012410768 = product of:
      0.055848457 = sum of:
        0.014968789 = weight(_text_:of in 3210) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014968789 = score(doc=3210,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.24433708 = fieldWeight in 3210, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3210)
        0.040879667 = weight(_text_:systems in 3210) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040879667 = score(doc=3210,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.339541 = fieldWeight in 3210, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3210)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Footnote
    Übers. d. Titels: The use of improved classification systems for the description management and searching of Internet sources
  15. Panzer, M.: Towards the "webification" of controlled subject vocabulary : a case study involving the Dewey Decimal Classification (2007) 0.01
    0.012286034 = product of:
      0.055287153 = sum of:
        0.014818345 = weight(_text_:of in 538) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014818345 = score(doc=538,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.24188137 = fieldWeight in 538, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=538)
        0.04046881 = weight(_text_:systems in 538) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04046881 = score(doc=538,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.33612844 = fieldWeight in 538, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=538)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    The presentation will briefly introduce a series of major principles for bringing subject terminology to the network level. A closer look at one KOS in particular, the Dewey Decimal Classification, should help to gain more insight into the perceived difficulties and potential benefits of building taxonomy services out and on top of classic large-scale vocabularies or taxonomies.
    Content
    Präsentation während der Veranstaltung "Networked Knowledge Organization Systems and Services: The 6th European Networked Knowledge Organization Systems (NKOS) Workshop, Workshop at the 11th ECDL Conference, Budapest, Hungary, September 21st 2007".
  16. Devadason, F.J.; Intaraksa, N.; Patamawongjariya, P.; Desai, K.: Faceted indexing application for organizing and accessing internet resources (2003) 0.01
    0.0118227275 = product of:
      0.05320227 = sum of:
        0.014666359 = weight(_text_:of in 3966) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014666359 = score(doc=3966,freq=24.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.23940048 = fieldWeight in 3966, product of:
              4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
                24.0 = termFreq=24.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3966)
        0.03853591 = weight(_text_:software in 3966) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03853591 = score(doc=3966,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.24794699 = fieldWeight in 3966, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3966)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    Organizing and providing access to the resources an the Internet has been a problem area in spite of the availability of sophisticated search engines and other Software tools. There have been several attempts to organize the resources an the WWW. Some of them have tried to use traditional library classification schemes such as the Library of Congress Classification, the Dewey Decimal Classification and others. However there is a need to assign proper subject headings to them and present them in a logical or hierarchical sequence to cater to the need for browsing. This paper attempts to describe an experimental system designed to organize and provide access to web documents using a faceted pre-coordinate indexing system based an the Deep Structure Indexing System (DSIS) derived from POPSI (Postulate based Permuted Subject Indexing) of Bhattacharyya, and the facet analysis and chain indexing System of Ranganathan. A prototype software system has been designed to create a database of records specifying Web documents according to the Dublin Core and input a faceted subject heading according to DSIS. Synonymous terms are added to the standard terms in the heading using appropriate symbols. Once the data are entered along with a description and URL of the Web document, the record is stored in the system. More than one faceted subject heading can be assigned to a record depending an the content of the original document. The system stores the surrogates and keeps the faceted subject headings separately after establishing a link. Search is carried out an index entries derived from the faceted subject heading using chain indexing technique. If a single term is input, the system searches for its presence in the faceted subject headings and displays the subject headings in a sorted sequence reflecting an organizing sequence. If the number of retrieved headings is too large (running into more than a page) then the user has the option of entering another search term to be searched in combination. The system searches subject headings already retrieved and look for those containing the second term. The retrieved faceted subject headings can be displayed and browsed. When the relevant subject heading is selected the system displays the records with their URLs. Using the URL the original document an the web can be accessed. The prototype system developed under Windows NT environment using ASP and web server is under rigorous testing. The database and indexes management routines need further development.
    Source
    Subject retrieval in a networked environment: Proceedings of the IFLA Satellite Meeting held in Dublin, OH, 14-16 August 2001 and sponsored by the IFLA Classification and Indexing Section, the IFLA Information Technology Section and OCLC. Ed.: I.C. McIlwaine
  17. Chowdhury, S.; Chowdhury, G.G.: Using DDC to create a visual knowledge map as an aid to online information retrieval (2004) 0.01
    0.011384499 = product of:
      0.051230244 = sum of:
        0.014666359 = weight(_text_:of in 2643) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014666359 = score(doc=2643,freq=24.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.23940048 = fieldWeight in 2643, product of:
              4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
                24.0 = termFreq=24.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2643)
        0.036563884 = weight(_text_:systems in 2643) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.036563884 = score(doc=2643,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.3036947 = fieldWeight in 2643, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2643)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    Selection of search terms in an online search environment can be facilitated by the visual display of a knowledge map showing the various concepts and their links. This paper reports an a preliminary research aimed at designing a prototype knowledge map using DDC and its visual display. The prototype knowledge map created using the Protégé and TGViz freeware has been demonstrated, and further areas of research in this field are discussed.
    Content
    1. Introduction Web search engines and digital libraries usually expect the users to use search terms that most accurately represent their information needs. Finding the most appropriate search terms to represent an information need is an age old problem in information retrieval. Keyword or phrase search may produce good search results as long as the search terms or phrase(s) match those used by the authors and have been chosen for indexing by the concerned information retrieval system. Since this does not always happen, a large number of false drops are produced by information retrieval systems. The retrieval results become worse in very large systems that deal with millions of records, such as the Web search engines and digital libraries. Vocabulary control tools are used to improve the performance of text retrieval systems. Thesauri, the most common type of vocabulary control tool used in information retrieval, appeared in the late fifties, designed for use with the emerging post-coordinate indexing systems of that time. They are used to exert terminology control in indexing, and to aid in searching by allowing the searcher to select appropriate search terms. A large volume of literature exists describing the design features, and experiments with the use, of thesauri in various types of information retrieval systems (see for example, Furnas et.al., 1987; Bates, 1986, 1998; Milstead, 1997, and Shiri et al., 2002).
    Source
    Knowledge organization and the global information society: Proceedings of the 8th International ISKO Conference 13-16 July 2004, London, UK. Ed.: I.C. McIlwaine
  18. Mills, J.: Faceted classification and logical division in information retrieval (2004) 0.01
    0.010916452 = product of:
      0.049124032 = sum of:
        0.024596233 = weight(_text_:of in 831) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024596233 = score(doc=831,freq=30.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.4014868 = fieldWeight in 831, product of:
              5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
                30.0 = termFreq=30.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=831)
        0.0245278 = weight(_text_:systems in 831) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0245278 = score(doc=831,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.2037246 = fieldWeight in 831, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=831)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    The main object of the paper is to demonstrate in detail the role of classification in information retrieval (IR) and the design of classificatory structures by the application of logical division to all forms of the content of records, subject and imaginative. The natural product of such division is a faceted classification. The latter is seen not as a particular kind of library classification but the only viable form enabling the locating and relating of information to be optimally predictable. A detailed exposition of the practical steps in facet analysis is given, drawing on the experience of the new Bliss Classification (BC2). The continued existence of the library as a highly organized information store is assumed. But, it is argued, it must acknowledge the relevance of the revolution in library classification that has taken place. It considers also how alphabetically arranged subject indexes may utilize controlled use of categorical (generically inclusive) and syntactic relations to produce similarly predictable locating and relating systems for IR.
    Footnote
    Artikel in einem Themenheft: The philosophy of information
  19. Devadason, F.J.; Intaraksa, N.; Patamawongjariya, P.; Desai, K.: Faceted indexing based system for organizing and accessing Internet resources (2002) 0.01
    0.01078606 = product of:
      0.04853727 = sum of:
        0.014818345 = weight(_text_:of in 97) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014818345 = score(doc=97,freq=32.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.24188137 = fieldWeight in 97, product of:
              5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
                32.0 = termFreq=32.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=97)
        0.033718925 = weight(_text_:software in 97) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033718925 = score(doc=97,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.21695362 = fieldWeight in 97, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=97)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    Organizing and providing access to the resources an the Internet has been a problem area in spite of the availability of sophisticated search engines and other Software tools. There have been several attempts to organize the resources an the World Wide Web. Some of them have tried to use traditional library classification schemes such as the Library of Congress Classification, the Dewey Decimal Classification and others. However there is a need to assign proper subject headings to them and present them in a logical or hierarchical sequence to cater to the need for browsing. This paper attempts to describe an experimental system designed to organize and provide access to web documents using a faceted pre-coordinate indexing system based an the Deep Structure Indexing System (DSIS) derived from POPSI (Postulate based Permuted Subject Indexing) of Bhattacharyya, and the facet analysis and chain indexing system of Ranganathan. A prototype Software System has been designed to create a database of records specifying Web documents according to the Dublin Core and to input a faceted subject heading according to DSIS. Synonymous terms are added to the Standard terms in the heading using appropriate symbols. Once the data are entered along with a description and the URL of the web document, the record is stored in the System. More than one faceted subject heading can be assigned to a record depending an the content of the original document. The System stores the Surrogates and keeps the faceted subject headings separately after establishing a link. The search is carried out an index entries derived from the faceted subject heading using the chain indexing technique. If a single term is Input, the System searches for its presence in the faceted subject headings and displays the subject headings in a sorted sequence reflecting an organizing sequence. If the number of retrieved Keadings is too large (running into more than a page) the user has the option of entering another search term to be searched in combination. The System searches subject headings already retrieved and looks for those containing the second term. The retrieved faceted subject headings can be displayed and browsed. When the relevant subject heading is selected the system displays the records with their URLs. Using the URL, the original document an the web can be accessed. The prototype system developed in a Windows NT environment using ASP and a web server is under rigorous testing. The database and Index management routines need further development.
    An interesting but somewhat confusing article telling how the writers described web pages with Dublin Core metadata, including a faceted classification, and built a system that lets users browse the collection through the facets. They seem to want to cover too much in a short article, and unnecessary space is given over to screen shots showing how Dublin Core metadata was entered. The screen shots of the resulting browsable system are, unfortunately, not as enlightening as one would hope, and there is no discussion of how the system was actually written or the technology behind it. Still, it could be worth reading as an example of such a system and how it is treated in journals.
    Footnote
    Vgl. auch: Devadason, F.J.: Facet analysis and Semantic Web: musings of a student of Ranganathan. Unter: http://www.geocities.com/devadason.geo/FASEMWEB.html#FacetedIndex.
  20. LaBarre, K.: Faceted navigation and browsing features in new OPACs : a more robust solution to problems of information seekers? (2007) 0.01
    0.010339408 = product of:
      0.046527337 = sum of:
        0.021999538 = weight(_text_:of in 688) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021999538 = score(doc=688,freq=24.0), product of:
            0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.3591007 = fieldWeight in 688, product of:
              4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
                24.0 = termFreq=24.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=688)
        0.0245278 = weight(_text_:systems in 688) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0245278 = score(doc=688,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.2037246 = fieldWeight in 688, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=688)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    At the end of 2005, impending digitization efforts and several developments related to the creation of access and discovery tools for informational and cultural objects resulted in a series of responses that continue to ripple throughout the library, museum and archive communities. These developments have broad implications for all three communities because of the goals shared by each in the creation of description, control and enhanced access to informational and cultural objects. This position paper will consider new implementations of faceted navigation and browsing features in online catalogs. It is also a response to challenges to develop interwoven approaches to the study of information seeking and the design and implementation of search and discovery systems. Urgently needed during this time of experimentation, development and implementation is a framework for system evaluation and critical analysis of needed and missing features that is grounded in traditional principles, borne out by practice. Such a framework could extend feature analysis protocols established during the early years of online catalog development.

Languages

  • e 76
  • d 4
  • hu 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 60
  • el 19
  • m 4
  • s 2
  • p 1
  • x 1
  • More… Less…