Search (8 results, page 1 of 1)

0.015116599 = product of:
  0.060466398 = sum of:
    0.0467477 = weight(_text_:world in 3509) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0467477 = score(doc=3509,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.15567686 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04050213 = queryNorm
        0.30028677 = fieldWeight in 3509, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3509)
    0.013718699 = product of:
      0.027437398 = sum of:
        0.027437398 = weight(_text_:22 in 3509) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027437398 = score(doc=3509,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14183156 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04050213 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3509, 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=3509)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)

Abstract

In light of ongoing debates about ontological vs. epistemological approaches to knowledge organization (KO), this paper examines E. C. Richardson's treatment of ontology and epistemology in his theory of classification. According to Richardson, there is a natural order of things in the world accessible to human cognition, which may be expressed in two classificatory orders: evolutionary classification, which ranges classes of things from the most simple to the most complex, and logical classification, which ranges classes of things in the inverse order, from the most complex to the most simple. Evolutionary classification reflects ontological order and logical classification reflects epistemological order: both are faces of a single natural order. Such a view requires adherence to a representationalist, or, in Hjorland's (2008) terms, positivist understanding of epistemology, wherein human knowledge faithfully mirrors the structure of the external world. Richardson's harmonization of ontology and epistemology will find little favor among proponents of the currently fashionable pragmatist approach to KO. Nevertheless, it constitutes an early version of what Gnoli (2004) terms a naturalistic epistemology, which, once deepened and clarified, offers the best prospects for an explicit expression of both the ontological and epistemological dimensions of knowledge within a single classification of general scope.

Pages

S.15-22

0.011693579 = product of:
  0.046774317 = sum of:
    0.03305562 = weight(_text_:world in 1418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03305562 = score(doc=1418,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15567686 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04050213 = queryNorm
        0.21233483 = fieldWeight in 1418, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1418)
    0.013718699 = product of:
      0.027437398 = sum of:
        0.027437398 = weight(_text_:22 in 1418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027437398 = score(doc=1418,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14183156 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04050213 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1418, 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=1418)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)

Abstract

Categories, or concepts of high generality representing the most basic kinds of entities in the world, have long been understood to be a fundamental element in the construction of knowledge organization systems (KOSs), particularly faceted ones. Commentators on facet analysis have tended to foreground the role of categories in the structuring of controlled vocabularies and the construction of compound index terms, and the implications of this for subject representation and information retrieval. Less attention has been paid to the variety of ways in which categories can shape the overall architectonic framework of a KOS. This case study explores the range of functions that categories took in structuring various aspects of an early analytico-synthetic KOS, Julius Otto Kaiser's method of Systematic Indexing (SI). Within SI, categories not only functioned as mechanisms to partition an index vocabulary into smaller groupings of terms and as elements in the construction of compound index terms but also served as means of defining the units of indexing, or index items, incorporated into an index; determining the organization of card index files and the articulation of the guide card system serving as a navigational aids thereto; and setting structural constraints to the establishment of cross-references between terms. In all these ways, Kaiser's system of categories contributed to the general systematicity of SI.

Source

Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik

0.0049583423 = product of:
  0.03966674 = sum of:
    0.03966674 = weight(_text_:world in 5549) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03966674 = score(doc=5549,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15567686 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04050213 = queryNorm
        0.25480178 = fieldWeight in 5549, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5549)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Julius Otto Kaiser (1968-1927) was a special librarian and indexer who, at the turn of the twentieth century, designed an innovative, category-based indexing system known as "systematic indexing." Although he is regarded as a pioneer of indexing and classification, little is known about his life. This essay seeks to fill in some gaps in Kaiser's biography by reviewing what is known of his life prior to his entry into information work: namely, his birth, childhood, and education in Germany; his early career as a musician and teacher in Australia; and his sojourn as a teacher in Chile. It is argued that Kaiser's early experiences equipped him with linguistic skills and a commercial outlook that smoothed his path into the world of business information and left traces in his thought about indexing and information work.

0.0037630405 = product of:
  0.030104324 = sum of:
    0.030104324 = product of:
      0.06020865 = sum of:
        0.06020865 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 3859) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06020865 = score(doc=3859,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.23490155 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04050213 = queryNorm
            0.2563144 = fieldWeight in 3859, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3859)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Modelling bibliographical entities is a prominent activity within knowledge organization today. Current models of bibliographic entities, such as Functional Requirements for Bibliographical Records (FRBR) and the Bibliographic Framework (BIBFRAME), take inspiration from data - modelling methods developed by computer scientists from the mid - 1970s on. Thus, it would seem that the modelling of bibliographic entities is an activity of very recent vintage. However, it is possible to find examples of bibliographical models from earlier periods of knowledge organization. The purpose of this paper is to draw attention to one such model, outlined by the early 20th - century British classification theorist E. Wyndham Hulme in his essay on "Principles of Book Classification" (1911 - 1912). There, Hulme set forth a classification of various attributes by which books can conceivably be classified. These he first divided into accidental and inseparable attributes. Accidental attributes were subdivided into edition - level and copy - level attributes and inseparable attitudes, into physical and non - physical attributes. Comparison of Hulme's classification of attributes with those of FRBR and BIBFRAME 2.0 reveals that the different classes of attributes in Hulme's classification correspond to groups of attributes associated with different bibliographical entities in those models. These later models assume the existence of different bibliographic entities in an abstraction hierarchy among which attributes are distributed, whereas Hulme posited only a single entity - the book - , whose various aspects he clustered into different classes of attributes. Thus, Hulme's model offers an interesting alternative to current assumptions about how to conceptualize the relationship between attributes and entities in the bibliographical universe.

0.0037630405 = product of:
  0.030104324 = sum of:
    0.030104324 = product of:
      0.06020865 = sum of:
        0.06020865 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 4141) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06020865 = score(doc=4141,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.23490155 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04050213 = queryNorm
            0.2563144 = fieldWeight in 4141, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4141)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Modelling bibliographical entities is a prominent activity within knowledge organization today. Current models of bibliographic entities, such as Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) and the Bibliographic Framework (BIBFRAME), take inspiration from data-modelling methods developed by computer scientists from the mid-1970s on. Thus, it would seem that the modelling of bibliographic entities is an activity of very recent vintage. However, it is possible to find examples of bibliographical models from earlier periods of knowledge organization. The purpose of this paper is to draw attention to one such model, outlined by the early twentiethcentury British classification theorist E. Wyndham Hulme in his essay on "Principles of Book Classification" (1911-1912). There, Hulme set forth a classification of various attributes by which books can be classified. These he first divided into "accidental" and "inseparable" attributes. Accidental attributes were subdivided into edition-level and copy-level attributes and inseparable attitudes, into "physical" and "non-physical" attributes. Comparison of Hulme's classification of attributes with those of FRBR and BIBFRAME 2.0 reveals that the different classes of attributes in Hulme's classification correspond to groups of attributes associated with different bibliographical entities in those models. These later models assume the existence of different bibliographic entities in an abstract hierarchy among which attributes are distributed, whereas Hulme posited only a single entity-the book-whose various aspects he clustered into different classes of attributes. Thus, Hulme's model offers an interesting alternative to current assumptions about how to conceptualize the relationship between attributes and entities in the bibliographical universe.

0.0035744905 = product of:
  0.028595924 = sum of:
    0.028595924 = weight(_text_:web in 4812) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028595924 = score(doc=4812,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13217913 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04050213 = queryNorm
        0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 4812, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4812)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Contrasts in 20th century classification theory relate to a transition from a universe of "knowledge" system towards one of "concepts' Initiatives to develop a Simple Knowledge Organization Systems (SKOS) standard based on classification schemes and taxonomies within the framework of the Semantic Web (SW) are attempts to bridge the gap. Current knowledge organization systems (KOS) seem to reinforce "syntactics" at the expense of semantics. We claim that all structure is syntactic but knowledge structures need to have a semantic component as well. Therefore we consider classifications as artificial languages. The Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) constitutes a natural language-independent notation system that allows for mediating between concepts and knowledge systems. We discuss an elementary theory of knowledge organization based on the structure of knowledge rather than on the content of documents. Semantics becomes not a matter of synonymous concepts, but rather of coordinating knowledge structures. The interactions between these systems represent interactions between different universes of knowledge or concepts.

0.0017148374 = product of:
  0.013718699 = sum of:
    0.013718699 = product of:
      0.027437398 = sum of:
        0.027437398 = weight(_text_:22 in 1417) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027437398 = score(doc=1417,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14183156 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04050213 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1417, 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=1417)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Source

Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik

0.0013718699 = product of:
  0.0109749595 = sum of:
    0.0109749595 = product of:
      0.021949919 = sum of:
        0.021949919 = weight(_text_:22 in 1424) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021949919 = score(doc=1424,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14183156 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04050213 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1424, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1424)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Source

Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik