Search (9 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  • × theme_ss:"International bedeutende Universalklassifikationen"
  1. Panzer, M.: Dewey: how to make it work for you (2013) 0.01 
    0.00832092 = product of:
  0.03883096 = sum of:
    0.02328653 = weight(_text_:system in 5797) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02328653 = score(doc=5797,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.30135927 = fieldWeight in 5797, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5797)
    0.0072343214 = weight(_text_:information in 5797) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0072343214 = score(doc=5797,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 5797, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5797)
    0.008310104 = product of:
      0.016620208 = sum of:
        0.016620208 = weight(_text_:22 in 5797) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016620208 = score(doc=5797,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.085914485 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5797, 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=5797)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    The article discusses various aspects of the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) system of classifying library books in 2013. Background is presented on some librarians' desire to stop using DDC and adopt a genre-based system of classification. It says librarians can use the DDC to deal with problems and issues related to library book classification. It highlights the benefits of using captions and relative index terms and semantic relationships in DDC.
    Content
    "As knowledge brokers, we are living in interesting times for libraries and librarians. We wonder sometimes if our traditional tools like the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) system can cope with the onslaught of information. The categories provided don't always seem adequate for the knowledge-discovery habits of today's patrons. They have grown accustomed to new ways for their information needs to be met, from the fire-and-forget style of a hard-to-control classic Google search to the pervasive, always-on style of Google Now, anticipating users' information needs without their having even asked a verbal question. Contrariwise, I believe that we, as librarians, could be making better use of our tools. Many (like the DDC) are a reflection of the same social and epistemological forces that brought about modernity at the turn of the last century. We as librarians are in the unique position of providing services that are as ground-breaking as these tools. As we see the need to provide unique and cutting-edge knowledge discovery to our users, I argue in this article that the DDC can play a key role in fulfilling this purpose."
    Source
    Knowledge quest. 42(2013) no.2, S.22-29
  2. Satija, M.P.: Abridged Dewey-15 (2012) in historical perspectives (2012) 0.00 
    0.0039033543 = product of:
  0.027323479 = sum of:
    0.019013375 = weight(_text_:system in 116) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019013375 = score(doc=116,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.24605882 = fieldWeight in 116, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=116)
    0.008310104 = product of:
      0.016620208 = sum of:
        0.016620208 = weight(_text_:22 in 116) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016620208 = score(doc=116,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.085914485 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 116, 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=116)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    The origin of the abridged edition of the Dewey system goes back to 1894 when an outline of 192 pages based on the full 5th Edition (1894) was issued for small public and school libraries of North America. New editions have appeared regularly following closely the publication of new full editions. An abridged version, which is always in one volume, comprises an introduction, schedules, four tables (namely 1, 2, 3 and 4) only, and the relative index and other minor features of the full edition, and has shorter numbers. Abridged 15 is a logical abridgement of the DDC23 (2011) and is a product of a new approach to development of an abridged edition of the DDC. Its content has been derived from the DDC database applying a set of rules to extract the edition using the new (2010) version of the editorial support system. The revision process has been informed by interaction with an always widening and diversified Dewey community at home and abroad. It aims to improve the currency of the schedules continuing to serve as shelving tool while recognizing its 'other' uses as a spinoff of its simplicity and inexpensiveness.
    Date
    3. 3.2016 18:59:22
  3. Slavic, A.; Davies, S.: Facet analysis in UDC : questions of structure, functionality and data formality (2017) 0.00 
    0.003692278 = product of:
  0.025845945 = sum of:
    0.013444485 = weight(_text_:system in 3848) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013444485 = score(doc=3848,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 3848, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3848)
    0.012401459 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3848) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012401459 = score(doc=3848,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 3848, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3848)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    The paper will look into different patterns of facet analysis used in the UDC schedules and how these affect the scheme presentation, the underlying data structure and the management of the classification scheme. From the very beginning, UDC was designed to represent the universe of knowledge as an integral whole allowing for subjects/concepts from all fields of knowledge to be combined, linked and the nature of their relationships made explicit. In Otlet's original design, the emphasis for his new type of classification was on the coordination of classmarks at the point of searching, i.e., post-coordination, which he firmly rooted in an expressive notational system. While some UDC classes exhibit various patterns of facet analytical theory proper, others, although used in an analytico-synthetic fashion, follow less canonical structural patterns. The authors highlight the lack of connection made throughout the various stages of UDC restructuring between: a) theoretical requirements of an overarching facet analytical theory as a founding principle guiding the construction of schedules; and, b) practical requirements for an analytico-synthetic classification in terms of notational presentation and data structure that enables its use in indexing and retrieval, as well as its management online.
  4. Piros, A.: ¬The thought behind the symbol : about the automatic interpretation and representation of UDC numbers (2017) 0.00 
    0.0026154653 = product of:
  0.018308256 = sum of:
    0.005906798 = weight(_text_:information in 3853) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005906798 = score(doc=3853,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 3853, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3853)
    0.012401459 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3853) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012401459 = score(doc=3853,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 3853, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3853)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    Analytico-synthetic and faceted classifications, such as Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) provide facilities to express pre-coordinated subject statements using syntactic relations. In this case, the relevance, in the process of UDC-based information retrieval, can be determined by extracting the meaning of the classmarks as precisely as is possible. The central question here is how the identification mentioned above can be supported by automatic means and an analysis of the structure of complex classmarks appears to be an obvious requirement. Many bibliographic sources contain complex UDC classmarks which are stored as simple text strings and on which it is very difficult to perform any meaningful information discovery. The paper presents results from a phase of ongoing research focused on developing a new platform-independent, machine-processable data format capable of representing the whole syntactic structure of the composite UDC numbers to support their further automatic processing. An algorithm that can produce the representation of the numbers in such a format directly from their designations has also been developed and implemented. The research also includes implementing conversion methods to provide outputs that can be employed by other software directly and, as a service, make them available for other software. The paper provides an overview of the solutions developed and implemented since 2015 and outlines future research plans.
  5. Junger, U.: Basisinformationen zur Universellen Dezimalklassifikation (UDK) (2018) 0.00 
    9.4972615E-4 = product of:
  0.0132961655 = sum of:
    0.0132961655 = product of:
      0.026592331 = sum of:
        0.026592331 = weight(_text_:22 in 4337) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026592331 = score(doc=4337,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.085914485 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4337, 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=4337)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    Date
    7. 7.2018 17:22:00
  6. Chatterjee, A.: Universal Decimal Classification and Colon Classification : their mutual impact (2015) 0.00 
    4.7734138E-4 = product of:
  0.006682779 = sum of:
    0.006682779 = weight(_text_:information in 1650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006682779 = score(doc=1650,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 1650, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1650)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    Source
    Annals of library and information studies. 62(2015) no.4, S. 226-230
  7. Panigrahi, P.: Ranganathan and Dewey in hierarchical subject classification : some similarities (2015) 0.00 
    4.7734138E-4 = product of:
  0.006682779 = sum of:
    0.006682779 = weight(_text_:information in 2789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006682779 = score(doc=2789,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 2789, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2789)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    Source
    Annals of library and information studies. 62(2015) no.4, S.265-267
  8. Lund, B.; Agbaji, D.: Use of Dewey Decimal Classification by academic libraries in the United States (2018) 0.00 
    4.176737E-4 = product of:
  0.0058474317 = sum of:
    0.0058474317 = weight(_text_:information in 5181) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0058474317 = score(doc=5181,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 5181, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5181)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    Abstract
    Nearly 25 years have elapsed since the last comprehensive measure of the percentage of academic libraries that employ the Dewey and Library of Congress systems of classification. To provide updated statistics, the researchers surveyed all 3793 academic libraries via their online catalogs. The findings indicate that the use of Dewey has declined over the past four decades. Teachers' Colleges and Community Colleges in particular have higher rates of Dewey use than large research or professional universities. This information may help support academic library reclassification decisions.
  9. Zins, C.; Santos, P.L.V.A.C.: Mapping the knowledge covered by library classification systems (2011) 0.00 
    3.5800604E-4 = product of:
  0.0050120843 = sum of:
    0.0050120843 = weight(_text_:information in 4449) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0050120843 = score(doc=4449,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4449, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4449)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.5, S.877-901

Authors

Languages

Types

Themes