Search (7 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Sauperl, A."
  1. Sauperl, A.: UDC and Folksonomies (2010) 0.03
    0.02598055 = product of:
      0.1039222 = sum of:
        0.07508315 = weight(_text_:supported in 4069) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07508315 = score(doc=4069,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22949564 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.9223356 = idf(docFreq=321, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03875087 = queryNorm
            0.3271659 = fieldWeight in 4069, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.9223356 = idf(docFreq=321, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4069)
        0.028839052 = weight(_text_:work in 4069) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028839052 = score(doc=4069,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14223081 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03875087 = queryNorm
            0.20276234 = fieldWeight in 4069, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4069)
      0.25 = coord(2/8)
    
    Abstract
    Social tagging systems, known as "folksonomies," represent an important part of web resource discovery as they enable free and unrestricted browsing through information space. Folksonomies consisting of subject designators (tags) assigned by users, however, have one important drawback: they do not express semantic relationships, either hierarchical or associative, between tags. As a consequence, the use of tags to browse information resources requires moving from one resource to another, based on coincidence and not on the pre-established meaningful or logical connections that may exist between related resources. We suggest that the semantic structure of the Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) may be used in complementing and supporting tag-based browsing. In this work, two specific questions were investigated: 1) Are terms used as tags in folksonomies included in the UDC?; and, 2) Which facets of UDC match the characteristics of documents or information objects that are tagged in folksonomies? A collection of the most popular tags from Amazon, LibraryThing, Delicious, and 43Things was investigated. The universal nature of UDC was examined through the universality of topics and facets covering diverse human interests which are at the same time interconnected and form a rich and intricate semantic structure. The results suggest that UDC-supported folksonomies could be implemented in resource discovery, in particular in library portals and catalogues.
  2. Sauperl, A.: Precoordination or not? : a new view of the old question (2009) 0.01
    0.010491143 = product of:
      0.041964572 = sum of:
        0.028839052 = weight(_text_:work in 3611) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028839052 = score(doc=3611,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14223081 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03875087 = queryNorm
            0.20276234 = fieldWeight in 3611, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3611)
        0.01312552 = product of:
          0.02625104 = sum of:
            0.02625104 = weight(_text_:22 in 3611) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02625104 = score(doc=3611,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13569894 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03875087 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3611, 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=3611)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(2/8)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - This paper aims to discuss some long-standing issues of the development of a subject heading language as pre- or postcoordinated. Design/methodology/approach - In a review of literature on pre- and postcoordination and user behaviour, 20 criteria originally discussed by Svenonius are considered. Findings - The advantages and disadvantages of pre- and postcoordinated systems are on a very similar level. Most subject heading languages developed recently are precoordinated. They all require investments in highly skilled intellectual work, and are therefore expensive and difficult to maintain. Postcoordinated systems seem to have more advantages for information providers, but less for users. However, most of these disadvantages could be overcome by known information retrieval models and techniques. Research limitations/implications - The criteria originally discussed by Svenonius are difficult to evaluate in an exact manner. Some of them are also irrelevant because of changes in information retrieval systems. Practical implications - It was found that the decision on whether to use a pre- or postcoordinated system cannot be taken independent of consideration of the subject authority file and the functions of an information retrieval system, which should support users on one hand and information providers and indexers on the other. Originality/value - This literature review brings together some findings that have not been considered together previously.
    Date
    20. 6.2010 14:22:43
  3. Sauperl, A.: Subject determination during the cataloging process : the development of a system based on theoretical principles (2002) 0.01
    0.009461433 = product of:
      0.03784573 = sum of:
        0.02997042 = weight(_text_:work in 2293) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02997042 = score(doc=2293,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.14223081 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03875087 = queryNorm
            0.2107168 = fieldWeight in 2293, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2293)
        0.007875311 = product of:
          0.015750622 = sum of:
            0.015750622 = weight(_text_:22 in 2293) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.015750622 = score(doc=2293,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13569894 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03875087 = queryNorm
                0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 2293, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2293)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(2/8)
    
    Date
    27. 9.2005 14:22:19
    Footnote
    Rez. in: Knowledge organization 30(2003) no.2, S.114-115 (M. Hudon); "This most interesting contribution to the literature of subject cataloguing originates in the author's doctoral dissertation, prepared under the direction of jerry Saye at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. In seven highly readable chapters, Alenka Sauperl develops possible answers to her principal research question: How do cataloguers determine or identify the topic of a document and choose appropriate subject representations? Specific questions at the source of this research an a process which has not been a frequent object of study include: Where do cataloguers look for an overall sense of what a document is about? How do they get an overall sense of what a document is about, especially when they are not familiar with the discipline? Do they consider only one or several possible interpretations? How do they translate meanings in appropriate and valid class numbers and subject headings? Using a strictly qualitative methodology, Dr. Sauperl's research is a study of twelve cataloguers in reallife situation. The author insists an the holistic rather than purely theoretical understanding of the process she is targeting. Participants in the study were professional cataloguers, with at least one year experience in their current job at one of three large academic libraries in the Southeastern United States. All three libraries have a large central cataloguing department, and use OCLC sources and the same automated system; the context of cataloguing tasks is thus considered to be reasonably comparable. All participants were volunteers in this study which combined two datagathering techniques: the think-aloud method and time-line interviews. A model of the subject cataloguing process was first developed from observations of a group of six cataloguers who were asked to independently perform original cataloguing an three nonfiction, non-serial items selected from materials regularly assigned to them for processing. The model was then used for follow-up interviews. Each participant in the second group of cataloguers was invited to reflect an his/her work process for a recent challenging document they had catalogued. Results are presented in 12 stories describing as many personal approaches to subject cataloguing. From these stories a summarization is offered and a theoretical model of subject cataloguing is developed which, according to the author, represents a realistic approach to subject cataloguing. Stories alternate comments from the researcher and direct quotations from the observed or interviewed cataloguers. Not surprisingly, the participants' stories reveal similarities in the sequence and accomplishment of several tasks in the process of subject cataloguing. Sauperl's proposed model, described in Chapter 5, includes as main stages: 1) Examination of the book and subject identification; 2) Search for subject headings; 3) Classification. Chapter 6 is a hypothetical Gase study, using the proposed model to describe the various stages of cataloguing a hypothetical resource. ...
    This document will be particularly useful to subject cataloguing teachers and trainers who could use the model to design case descriptions and exercises. We believe it is an accurate description of the reality of subject cataloguing today. But now that we know how things are dope, the next interesting question may be: Is that the best way? Is there a better, more efficient, way to do things? We can only hope that Dr. Sauperl will soon provide her own view of methods and techniques that could improve the flow of work or address the cataloguers' concern as to the lack of feedback an their work. Her several excellent suggestions for further research in this area all build an bits and pieces of what is done already, and stay well away from what could be done by the various actors in the area, from the designers of controlled vocabularies and authority files to those who use these tools an a daily basis to index, classify, or search for information."
  4. Sauperl, A.; Klasinc, J.; Luzar, S.: Components of abstracts : logical structure of scholarly abstracts in pharmacology, sociology, and linguistics and literature (2008) 0.01
    0.009385394 = product of:
      0.07508315 = sum of:
        0.07508315 = weight(_text_:supported in 1961) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07508315 = score(doc=1961,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22949564 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.9223356 = idf(docFreq=321, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03875087 = queryNorm
            0.3271659 = fieldWeight in 1961, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.9223356 = idf(docFreq=321, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1961)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Abstract
    The international standard ISO 214:1976 defines an abstract as "an abbreviated, accurate representation of the contents of a document" (p. 1) that should "enable readers to identify the basic content of a document quickly and accurately to determine relevance" (p. 1). It also should be useful in computerized searching. The ISO standard suggests including the following elements: purpose, methods, results, and conclusions. Researchers have often challenged this structure and found that different disciplines and cultures prefer different information content. These claims are partially supported by the findings of our research into the structure of pharmacology, sociology, and Slovenian language and literature abstracts of papers published in international and Slovenian scientific periodicals. The three disciplines have different information content. Slovenian pharmacology abstracts differ in content from those in international periodicals while the differences between international and Slovenian abstracts are small in sociology. In the field of Slovenian language and literature, only domestic abstracts were studied. The identified differences can in part be attributed to the disciplines, but also to the different role of journals and papers in the professional society and to differences in perception of the role of abstracts. The findings raise questions about the structure of abstracts required by some publishers of international journals.
  5. Pogorelec, A.; Sauperl, A.: ¬The alternative model of classification of belles-lettres in libraries (2006) 0.01
    0.006243838 = product of:
      0.049950704 = sum of:
        0.049950704 = weight(_text_:work in 405) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.049950704 = score(doc=405,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.14223081 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03875087 = queryNorm
            0.35119468 = fieldWeight in 405, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=405)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Abstract
    Several systems for the classification of fiction have been proposed to date, but experience shows that such classification partially depends on the culture and literary education in specific countries. Slovenian public libraries have traditionally used UDC as the only subject information on belles-lettres. Research has shown that users would prefer richer subject information. Therefore an attempt was made to enhance UDC by adding subject information, that should be helpful to users and librarians. The newly proposed Alternative Model system contains lists of verbal and alpha-numerical denotations for the basic groups of belles-lettres book material (main-genres: lyrics, drama, epics) and all other categorical criteria (language of the original literary work, literature to which the work belongs, genre, sub-genre) and half-categorical (accessibility of the content of literary works, origin within the periods of literary history, the century in which the literary work was written, the rhythm of the language). All these lists are available, but not included in this paper. The idea of the Alternative Model system is to show the possibilities of making the classification of belles-lettres in libraries more helpful, efficient and exact.
  6. Sauperl, A.; Rozman, D.: Subject cataloguing at the crossroads : with or without subject heading strings? (2007) 0.00
    0.00328138 = product of:
      0.02625104 = sum of:
        0.02625104 = product of:
          0.05250208 = sum of:
            0.05250208 = weight(_text_:22 in 245) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05250208 = score(doc=245,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13569894 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03875087 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 245, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=245)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Source
    Knjiznice za prihodnost : napredek in sodelovanje : zbornik referatov [ Libraries for the future : development and collaboration: proceedings / Professional conference of Union of associations of Slovene Librarians], Portoroz, October 22-23, 2007; ed. M. Ambrozic
  7. Sauperl, A.; Saye, J.D.: Pebbles for the mosais of cataloging expertise : what do problems in expert systems for cataloging reveal about cataloging expertise? (1999) 0.00
    0.0019688278 = product of:
      0.015750622 = sum of:
        0.015750622 = product of:
          0.031501245 = sum of:
            0.031501245 = weight(_text_:22 in 103) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031501245 = score(doc=103,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13569894 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03875087 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 103, 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=103)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22