Search (192 results, page 1 of 10)

  • × theme_ss:"Klassifikationstheorie: Elemente / Struktur"
  • × language_ss:"e"
  1. Hjoerland, B.: Theories of knowledge organization - theories of knowledge (2017) 0.04 
    0.03817688 = product of:
  0.12725626 = sum of:
    0.02187783 = weight(_text_:und in 3494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02187783 = score(doc=3494,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.34282678 = fieldWeight in 3494, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3494)
    0.041574836 = weight(_text_:der in 3494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041574836 = score(doc=3494,freq=28.0), product of:
        0.06431698 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.6464053 = fieldWeight in 3494, product of:
          5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
            28.0 = termFreq=28.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3494)
    0.02187783 = weight(_text_:und in 3494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02187783 = score(doc=3494,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.34282678 = fieldWeight in 3494, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3494)
    0.024151731 = weight(_text_:des in 3494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024151731 = score(doc=3494,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.079736836 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.302893 = fieldWeight in 3494, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3494)
    0.0041203224 = weight(_text_:in in 3494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0041203224 = score(doc=3494,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.10520181 = fieldWeight in 3494, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3494)
    0.013653717 = product of:
      0.027307434 = sum of:
        0.027307434 = weight(_text_:22 in 3494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027307434 = score(doc=3494,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10082839 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02879306 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3494, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3494)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.3 = coord(6/20)
    Pages
    S.22-36
    Series
    Fortschritte in der Wissensorganisation; Bd.13
    Source
    Theorie, Semantik und Organisation von Wissen: Proceedings der 13. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) und dem 13. Internationalen Symposium der Informationswissenschaft der Higher Education Association for Information Science (HI) Potsdam (19.-20.03.2013): 'Theory, Information and Organization of Knowledge' / Proceedings der 14. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) und Natural Language & Information Systems (NLDB) Passau (16.06.2015): 'Lexical Resources for Knowledge Organization' / Proceedings des Workshops der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) auf der SEMANTICS Leipzig (1.09.2014): 'Knowledge Organization and Semantic Web' / Proceedings des Workshops der Polnischen und Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) Cottbus (29.-30.09.2011): 'Economics of Knowledge Production and Organization'. Hrsg. von W. Babik, H.P. Ohly u. K. Weber
  2. Scerri, E.R.: ¬The periodic table : its story and its significance (2007) 0.03 
    0.025198719 = product of:
  0.100794874 = sum of:
    0.04393441 = weight(_text_:allgemeines in 2492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04393441 = score(doc=2492,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.16427658 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.705423 = idf(docFreq=399, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.2674417 = fieldWeight in 2492, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.705423 = idf(docFreq=399, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2492)
    0.017541287 = weight(_text_:und in 2492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017541287 = score(doc=2492,freq=28.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.27487293 = fieldWeight in 2492, product of:
          5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
            28.0 = termFreq=28.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2492)
    0.014286012 = weight(_text_:der in 2492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014286012 = score(doc=2492,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.06431698 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.22211882 = fieldWeight in 2492, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2492)
    0.017541287 = weight(_text_:und in 2492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017541287 = score(doc=2492,freq=28.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.27487293 = fieldWeight in 2492, product of:
          5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
            28.0 = termFreq=28.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2492)
    0.0074918782 = weight(_text_:in in 2492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0074918782 = score(doc=2492,freq=36.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.1912858 = fieldWeight in 2492, product of:
          6.0 = tf(freq=36.0), with freq of:
            36.0 = termFreq=36.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2492)
  0.25 = coord(5/20)
    Abstract
    The periodic table is one of the most potent icons in science. It lies at the core of chemistry and embodies the most fundamental principles of the field. The one definitive text on the development of the periodic table by van Spronsen (1969), has been out of print for a considerable time. The present book provides a successor to van Spronsen, but goes further in giving an evaluation of the extent to which modern physics has, or has not, explained the periodic system. The book is written in a lively style to appeal to experts and interested lay-persons alike. The Periodic Table begins with an overview of the importance of the periodic table and of the elements and it examines the manner in which the term 'element' has been interpreted by chemists and philosophers. The book then turns to a systematic account of the early developments that led to the classification of the elements including the work of Lavoisier, Boyle and Dalton and Cannizzaro. The precursors to the periodic system, like Dobereiner and Gmelin, are discussed. In chapter 3 the discovery of the periodic system by six independent scientists is examined in detail. Two chapters are devoted to the discoveries of Mendeleev, the leading discoverer, including his predictions of new elements and his accommodation of already existing elements. Chapters 6 and 7 consider the impact of physics including the discoveries of radioactivity and isotopy and successive theories of the electron including Bohr's quantum theoretical approach. Chapter 8 discusses the response to the new physical theories by chemists such as Lewis and Bury who were able to draw on detailed chemical knowledge to correct some of the early electronic configurations published by Bohr and others. Chapter 9 provides a critical analysis of the extent to which modern quantum mechanics is, or is not, able to explain the periodic system from first principles. Finally, chapter 10 considers the way that the elements evolved following the Big Bang and in the interior of stars. The book closes with an examination of further chemical aspects including lesser known trends within the periodic system such as the knight's move relationship and secondary periodicity, as well at attempts to explain such trends.
    BK
    35.01 / Geschichte der Chemie
    Classification
    VB 2400 Chemie und Pharmazie / Bibliographien und Nachschlagewerke, Geschichte und Didaktik der Chemie und Pharmazie, Betriebssicherheit / Geschichte der Chemie und Pharmazie / Geschichte einzelner Probleme und Teilgebiete der Chemie und Pharmazie / Allgemeines
    35.01 / Geschichte der Chemie
    Footnote
    Rez. in: KO 35(2008) no.4, S.251-254 (B. Hjoerland): "The book is about the classification of chemical elements known as the periodical system. It is described as "one of the most potent icons in science [.] One sees periodic tables everywhere: in industrial labs, workshops, academic labs, and of course, lecture halls" (p. xiii). Among all taxonomies in all domains, there is probably none more respected and more useful than this one. As Scerri states (p. 25): The periodic table ranks as one of the most fruitful and unifying ideas in the whole of modern science, comparable perhaps with Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection. Unlike such theories as Newtonian mechanics, the periodic table has not been falsified by developments in modern physics but has evolved while remaining essentially unchanged. After evolving for nearly 150 years through the work of numerous individuals, the periodic table remains at the heart of chemistry. This is mainly because it is of immense practical benefit for making predictions about all manner of chemical and physical properties of the elements and possibilities for bond formation. The periodic system provides the basic criteria for organizing knowledge about all the material stuff in the entire universe. It is thus a model that anybody with interests in knowledge organization (KO) should know. Knowledge about the history, philosophy and status of the periodic system also provides important insight for knowledge organization in general. . . . Scerri's book demonstrates how one of the most important classification systems has evolved and what kinds of conceptualizations and classification criteria are at work in it. It is probably the best book about the best classification system ever constructed. It should belong to any library supporting teaching and research in knowledge organization."
    Object
    Periodensystem der Elemente
    RVK
    VB 2400 Chemie und Pharmazie / Bibliographien und Nachschlagewerke, Geschichte und Didaktik der Chemie und Pharmazie, Betriebssicherheit / Geschichte der Chemie und Pharmazie / Geschichte einzelner Probleme und Teilgebiete der Chemie und Pharmazie / Allgemeines
  3. Bowker, G.C.; Star, S.L.: Sorting things out : classification and its consequences (1999) 0.02 
    0.017658276 = product of:
  0.088291384 = sum of:
    0.05857921 = weight(_text_:allgemeines in 733) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05857921 = score(doc=733,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.16427658 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.705423 = idf(docFreq=399, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.35658893 = fieldWeight in 733, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.705423 = idf(docFreq=399, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=733)
    0.012501617 = weight(_text_:und in 733) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012501617 = score(doc=733,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.19590102 = fieldWeight in 733, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=733)
    0.012501617 = weight(_text_:und in 733) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012501617 = score(doc=733,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.19590102 = fieldWeight in 733, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=733)
    0.00470894 = weight(_text_:in in 733) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00470894 = score(doc=733,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.120230645 = fieldWeight in 733, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=733)
  0.2 = coord(4/20)
    Abstract
    Is this book sociology, anthropology, or taxonomy? Sorting Things Out, by communications theorists Geoffrey C. Bowker and Susan Leigh Star, covers a lot of conceptual ground in its effort to sort out exactly how and why we classify and categorize the things and concepts we encounter day to day. But the analysis doesn't stop there; the authors go on to explore what happens to our thinking as a result of our classifications. With great insight and precise academic language, they pick apart our information systems and language structures that lie deeper than the everyday categories we use. The authors focus first on the International Classification of Diseases (ICD), a widely used scheme used by health professionals worldwide, but also look at other health information systems, racial classifications used by South Africa during apartheid, and more. Though it comes off as a bit too academic at times (by the end of the 20th century, most writers should be able to get the spelling of McDonald's restaurant right), the book has a clever charm that thoughtful readers will surely appreciate. A sly sense of humor sneaks into the writing, giving rise to the chapter title "The Kindness of Strangers," for example. After arguing that categorization is both strongly influenced by and a powerful reinforcer of ideology, it follows that revolutions (political or scientific) must change the way things are sorted in order to throw over the old system. Who knew that such simple, basic elements of thought could have such far-reaching consequences? Whether you ultimately place it with social science, linguistics, or (as the authors fear) fantasy, make sure you put Sorting Things Out in your reading pile.
    BK
    02.10 / Wissenschaft und Gesellschaft
    Classification
    AN 93400 Allgemeines / Buch- und Bibliothekswesen, Informationswissenschaft / Informationswissenschaft / Grundlagen, Theorie / Klassifikation
    02.10 / Wissenschaft und Gesellschaft
    Footnote
    Rez. in: Knowledge organization 27(2000) no.3, H.175-177 (B. Kwasnik); College and research libraries 61(2000) no.4, S.380-381 (J. Williams); Library resources and technical services 44(2000) no.4, S.107-108 (H.A. Olson); JASIST 51(2000) no.12, S.1149-1150 (T.A. Brooks)
    RVK
    AN 93400 Allgemeines / Buch- und Bibliothekswesen, Informationswissenschaft / Informationswissenschaft / Grundlagen, Theorie / Klassifikation
  4. Kaula, P.N.: Canons in analytico-synthetic classification (1979) 0.01 
    0.014682633 = product of:
  0.07341316 = sum of:
    0.021653436 = weight(_text_:und in 1428) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021653436 = score(doc=1428,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.33931053 = fieldWeight in 1428, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1428)
    0.025397355 = weight(_text_:der in 1428) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025397355 = score(doc=1428,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06431698 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.3948779 = fieldWeight in 1428, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1428)
    0.021653436 = weight(_text_:und in 1428) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021653436 = score(doc=1428,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.33931053 = fieldWeight in 1428, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1428)
    0.00470894 = weight(_text_:in in 1428) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00470894 = score(doc=1428,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.120230645 = fieldWeight in 1428, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1428)
  0.2 = coord(4/20)
    Source
    Klassifikation und Erkenntnis II. Proc. der Plenarvorträge und der Sektion 2 u. 3 "Wissensdarstellung und Wissensvermittlung" der 3. Fachtagung der Gesellschaft für Klassifikation, Königstein/Ts., 5.-6.4.1979
  5. Svenonius, E.: Facets as semantic categories (1979) 0.01 
    0.012174437 = product of:
  0.060872182 = sum of:
    0.016240077 = weight(_text_:und in 1427) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016240077 = score(doc=1427,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.2544829 = fieldWeight in 1427, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1427)
    0.019048017 = weight(_text_:der in 1427) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019048017 = score(doc=1427,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06431698 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.29615843 = fieldWeight in 1427, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1427)
    0.016240077 = weight(_text_:und in 1427) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016240077 = score(doc=1427,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.2544829 = fieldWeight in 1427, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1427)
    0.009344013 = weight(_text_:in in 1427) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009344013 = score(doc=1427,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.23857531 = fieldWeight in 1427, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1427)
  0.2 = coord(4/20)
    Abstract
    The paper looks at the semantic and syntactic components of facet definition. In synthetic classificatory languages, primitive terms are categorized into facets; facet information, when, is used in stating the syntactic rules for combining primitive terms into the acceptable (well-formed) complex expressions in the language. In other words, the structure of a synthetic classificatory language can be defined in terms of the facets recognized in the language and the syntactic rules employed by the language. Thus, facets are the "grammatical categories" of classificatory languages and their definition is the first step in formulating structural descriptions of such languages. As well, the study of how facets are defined can give some insight into how language is used to embody information
    Source
    Klassifikation und Erkenntnis II. Proc. der Plenarvorträge und der Sektion 2 u. 3 "Wissensdarstellung und Wissensvermittlung" der 3. Fachtagung der Gesellschaft für Klassifikation, Königstein/Ts., 5.-6.4.1979
  6. Gopinath, M.A.; Prasad, K.N.: Compatibility of the principles for design of thesaurus and classification scheme (1976) 0.01 
    0.010017176 = product of:
  0.06678117 = sum of:
    0.018752426 = weight(_text_:und in 2943) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018752426 = score(doc=2943,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.29385152 = fieldWeight in 2943, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2943)
    0.018752426 = weight(_text_:und in 2943) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018752426 = score(doc=2943,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.29385152 = fieldWeight in 2943, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2943)
    0.029276319 = weight(_text_:des in 2943) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029276319 = score(doc=2943,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.079736836 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.36716178 = fieldWeight in 2943, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2943)
  0.15 = coord(3/20)
    Theme
    Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
  7. Bliss, H.E.: ¬A bibliographic classification : principles and definitions (1985) 0.00 
    0.0039956435 = product of:
  0.026637623 = sum of:
    0.0063493387 = weight(_text_:der in 3621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0063493387 = score(doc=3621,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06431698 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.09871948 = fieldWeight in 3621, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3621)
    0.009758773 = weight(_text_:des in 3621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009758773 = score(doc=3621,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.079736836 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.12238726 = fieldWeight in 3621, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3621)
    0.010529511 = weight(_text_:in in 3621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010529511 = score(doc=3621,freq=40.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.26884392 = fieldWeight in 3621, product of:
          6.3245554 = tf(freq=40.0), with freq of:
            40.0 = termFreq=40.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3621)
  0.15 = coord(3/20)
    Abstract
    Henry Evelyn Bliss (1870-1955) devoted several decades of his life to the study of classification and the development of the Bibliographic Classification scheme while serving as a librarian in the College of the City of New York. In the course of the development of the Bibliographic Classification, Bliss developed a body of classification theory published in a number of articles and books, among which the best known are The Organization of Knowledge and the System of the Sciences (1929), Organization of Knowledge in Libraries and the Subject Approach to Books (1933; 2nd ed., 1939), and the lengthy preface to A Bibliographic Classification (Volumes 1-2, 1940; 2nd ed., 1952). In developing the Bibliographic Classification, Bliss carefully established its philosophical and theoretical basis, more so than was attempted by the makers of other classification schemes, with the possible exception of S. R. Ranganathan (q.v.) and his Colon Classification. The basic principles established by Bliss for the Bibliographic Classification are: consensus, collocation of related subjects, subordination of special to general and gradation in specialty, and the relativity of classes and of classification (hence alternative location and alternative treatment). In the preface to the schedules of A Bibliographic Classification, Bliss spells out the general principles of classification as weIl as principles specifically related to his scheme. The first volume of the schedules appeared in 1940. In 1952, he issued a second edition of the volume with a rewritten preface, from which the following excerpt is taken, and with the addition of a "Concise Synopsis," which is also included here to illustrate the principles of classificatory structure. In the excerpt reprinted below, Bliss discusses the correlation between classes, concepts, and terms, as weIl as the hierarchical structure basic to his classification scheme. In his discussion of cross-classification, Bliss recognizes the "polydimensional" nature of classification and the difficulties inherent in the two-dimensional approach which is characteristic of linear classification. This is one of the earliest works in which the multidimensional nature of classification is recognized. The Bibliographic Classification did not meet with great success in the United States because the Dewey Decimal Classification and the Library of Congress Classification were already weIl ensconced in American libraries by then. Nonetheless, it attracted considerable attention in the British Commonwealth and elsewhere in the world. A committee was formed in Britain which later became the Bliss Classification Association. A faceted edition of the scheme has been in preparation under the direction of J. Mills and V. Broughton. Several parts of this new edition, entitled Bliss Bibliographic Classification, have been published.
    Footnote
    Nachdruck des Originalartikels mit Kommentierung durch die Herausgeber
    Original in: Bliss, H.E.: A bibliographic classification extended by systematic auxuliary schedules for composite specification and notation. vols 1-2. 2nd ed. New York: Wilson 1952. S.3-11.
    Theme
    Geschichte der Klassifikationssysteme
  8. Ranganathan, S.R.: Facet analysis: fundamental categories (1985) 0.00 
    0.0033883292 = product of:
  0.02258886 = sum of:
    0.005555671 = weight(_text_:der in 3631) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005555671 = score(doc=3631,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06431698 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.08637954 = fieldWeight in 3631, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3631)
    0.008538926 = weight(_text_:des in 3631) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008538926 = score(doc=3631,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.079736836 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.10708885 = fieldWeight in 3631, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3631)
    0.008494263 = weight(_text_:in in 3631) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008494263 = score(doc=3631,freq=34.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.2168791 = fieldWeight in 3631, product of:
          5.8309517 = tf(freq=34.0), with freq of:
            34.0 = termFreq=34.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3631)
  0.15 = coord(3/20)
    Abstract
    Among the theorists in the field of subject analysis in the twentieth century, none has been more influential than S. R. Ranganathan (1892-1972) of India, a mathematician by training who turned to librarianship and made some of the most far-reaching contributions to the theory of librarianship in general and subject analysis in particular. Dissatisfied with both the Dewey Decimal Classification and the Universal Decimal Classification, Ranganathan set out to develop his own system. His Colon Classification was first published in 1933 and went through six editions; the seventh edition was in progress when Ranganathan died in 1972. In the course of developing the Colon Classification, Ranganathan formulated a body of classification theory which was published in numerous writings, of which the best known are Elements of Library Classification (1945; 3rd ed., 1962) and Prolegomena to Library Classification (1967). Among the principles Ranganathan established, the most powerful and influential are those relating to facet analysis. Ranganathan demonstrated that facet analysis (breaking down subjects into their component parts) and synthesis (recombining these parts to fit the documents) provide the most viable approach to representing the contents of documents. Although the idea and use of facets, though not always called by that name, have been present for a long time (for instance, in the Dewey Decimal Classification and Charles A. Cutter's Expansive Classification), Ranganathan was the person who systematized the ideas and established principles for them. For his Colon Classification, Ranganathan identified five fundamental categories: Personality (P), Material (M), Energy (E), Space (S) and Time (T) and the citation order PMEST based an the idea of decreasing concreteness.
    The Colon Classification has not been widely adopted; however, the theory of facet analysis and synthesis Ranganathan developed has proved to be most influential. Although many theorists of subject analysis do not totally agree with his fundamental categories or citation order, Ranganathan's concept of facet analysis and synthesis has provided a viable method and a framework for approaching subject analysis and has become the foundation of subject analysis in the twentieth century. In this sense, his theory laid the groundwork for later investigations and inquiries into the nature of subject and classificatory categories and citation order. His influence is felt in all modern classification schemes and indexing systems. This is attested to by the citations to his ideas and works in numerous papers included in this collection and by the fact that other modern classification systems such as the Dewey Decimal Classification and the Bliss Bibliographic Classification have become increasingly faceted in recent editions. The following chapter from Elements of Library Classification represents one of Ranganathan's many expositions of facet analysis and fundamental categories. It is chosen because of its clarity of expression and comprehensibility (many readers find the majority of his writings difficult to understand).
    Footnote
    Nachdruck des Originalartikels mit Kommentierung durch die Herausgeber
    Original in: Ranganathan, S.R.: Elements of library classification. 3rd ed. Bombay: Asia Publishing House 1962. S.82-89
    Theme
    Geschichte der Klassifikationssysteme
  9. Foskett, D.J.: Systems theory and its relevance to documentary classification (2017) 0.00 
    0.003046978 = product of:
  0.03046978 = sum of:
    0.00706341 = weight(_text_:in in 3176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00706341 = score(doc=3176,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 3176, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3176)
    0.023406371 = product of:
      0.046812743 = sum of:
        0.046812743 = weight(_text_:22 in 3176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046812743 = score(doc=3176,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10082839 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02879306 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3176, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3176)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.1 = coord(2/20)
    Date
    6. 5.2017 18:46:22
    Footnote
    Wiederabdruck in: Knowledge organization. 44(2017) no.2, S.129-134.
  10. Beghtol, C.: Response to Hjoerland and Nicolaisen (2004) 0.00 
    0.0028769341 = product of:
  0.01917956 = sum of:
    0.0054694577 = weight(_text_:und in 3536) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0054694577 = score(doc=3536,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.085706696 = fieldWeight in 3536, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3536)
    0.0054694577 = weight(_text_:und in 3536) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0054694577 = score(doc=3536,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.085706696 = fieldWeight in 3536, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3536)
    0.008240645 = weight(_text_:in in 3536) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008240645 = score(doc=3536,freq=32.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.21040362 = fieldWeight in 3536, product of:
          5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
            32.0 = termFreq=32.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3536)
  0.15 = coord(3/20)
    Abstract
    I am writing to correct some of the misconceptions that Hjoerland and Nicolaisen appear to have about my paper in the previous issue of Knowledge Organization. I would like to address aspects of two of these misapprehensions. The first is the faulty interpretation they have given to my use of the term "naïve classification," and the second is the kinds of classification systems that they appear to believe are discussed in my paper as examples of "naïve classifications." First, the term "naïve classification" is directly analogous to the widely-understood and widelyaccepted term "naïve indexing." It is not analogous to the terms to which Hjorland and Nicolaisen compare it (i.e., "naïve physics", "naïve biology"). The term as I have defined it is not pejorative. It does not imply that the scholars who have developed naïve classifications have not given profoundly serious thought to their own scholarly work. My paper distinguishes between classifications for new knowledge developed by scholars in the various disciplines for the purposes of advancing disciplinary knowledge ("naïve classifications") and classifications for previously existing knowledge developed by information professionals for the purposes of creating access points in information retrieval systems ("professional classifications"). This distinction rests primarily an the purpose of the kind of classification system in question and only secondarily an the knowledge base of the scholars who have created it. Hjoerland and Nicolaisen appear to have misunderstood this point, which is made clearly and adequately in the title, in the abstract and throughout the text of my paper.
    Second, the paper posits that these different reasons for creating classification systems strongly influence the content and extent of the two kinds of classifications, but not necessarily their structures. By definition, naïve classifications for new knowledge have been developed for discrete areas of disciplinary inquiry in new areas of knowledge. These classifications do not attempt to classify the whole of that disciplinary area. That is, naïve classifications have a explicit purpose that is significantly different from the purpose of the major disciplinary classifications Hjoer-land and Nicolaisen provide as examples of classifications they think I discuss under the rubric of "naïve classifications" (e.g., classifications for the entire field of archaeology, biology, linguistics, music, psychology, etc.). My paper is not concerned with these important classifications for major disciplinary areas. Instead, it is concerned solely and specifically with scholarly classifications for small areas of new knowledge within these major disciplines (e.g., cloth of aresta, double harpsichords, child-rearing practices, anomalous phenomena, etc.). Thus, I have nowhere suggested or implied that the broad disciplinary classifications mentioned by Hjoerland and Nicolaisen are appropriately categorized as "naïve classifications." For example, I have not associated the Periodic System of the Elements with naïve classifications, as Hjoerland and Nicolaisen state that I have done. Indeed, broad classifications of this type fall well outside the definition of naïve classifications set out in my paper. In this case, too, 1 believe that Hjorland and Nicolaisen have misunderstood an important point in my paper. I agree with a number of points made in Hjorland and Nicolaisen's paper. In particular, I agree that researchers in the knowledge organization field should adhere to the highest standards of scholarly and scientific precision. For that reason, I am glad to have had the opportunity to respond to their paper.
    Footnote
    Bezugnahme auf: Hjoerland, B., J. Nicolaisen: Scientific and scholarly classifications are not "naïve": a comment to Beghtol (2003). In: Knowledge organization. 31(2004) no.1, S.55-61. - Vgl. die Erwiderung von Nicolaisen und Hjoerland in KO 31(2004) no.3, S.199-201.
  11. Connaway, L.S.; Sievert, M.C.: Comparison of three classification systems for information on health insurance (1996) 0.00 
    0.002502213 = product of:
  0.025022129 = sum of:
    0.00941788 = weight(_text_:in in 7242) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00941788 = score(doc=7242,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.24046129 = fieldWeight in 7242, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7242)
    0.015604248 = product of:
      0.031208497 = sum of:
        0.031208497 = weight(_text_:22 in 7242) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031208497 = score(doc=7242,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10082839 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02879306 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 7242, 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=7242)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.1 = coord(2/20)
    Abstract
    Reports results of a comparative study of 3 classification schemes: LCC, DDC and NLM Classification to determine their effectiveness in classifying materials on health insurance. Examined 2 hypotheses: that there would be no differences in the scatter of the 3 classification schemes; and that there would be overlap between all 3 schemes but no difference in the classes into which the subject was placed. There was subject scatter in all 3 classification schemes and litlle overlap between the 3 systems
    Date
    22. 4.1997 21:10:19
  12. Vukadin, A.; Slavic, A.: Challenges of facet analysis and concept placement in Universal Classifications : the example of architecture in UDC (2014) 0.00 
    0.0023937372 = product of:
  0.02393737 = sum of:
    0.012234186 = weight(_text_:in in 1428) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012234186 = score(doc=1428,freq=24.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.3123684 = fieldWeight in 1428, product of:
          4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
            24.0 = termFreq=24.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1428)
    0.011703186 = product of:
      0.023406371 = sum of:
        0.023406371 = weight(_text_:22 in 1428) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023406371 = score(doc=1428,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10082839 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02879306 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1428, 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=1428)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.1 = coord(2/20)
    Abstract
    The paper discusses the challenges of faceted vocabulary organization in universal classifications which treat the universe of knowledge as a coherent whole and in which the concepts and subjects in different disciplines are shared, related and combined. The authors illustrate the challenges of the facet analytical approach using, as an example, the revision of class 72 in UDC. The paper reports on the research undertaken in 2013 as preparation for the revision. This consisted of analysis of concept organization in the UDC schedules in comparison with the Art & Architecture Thesaurus and class W of the Bliss Bibliographic Classification. The paper illustrates how such research can contribute to a better understanding of the field and may lead to improvements in the facet structure of this segment of the UDC vocabulary.
    Series
    Advances in knowledge organization; vol. 14
    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
  13. Perreault, J.: Categories and relators : a new schema (1994) 0.00 
    0.002170157 = product of:
  0.021701569 = sum of:
    0.014638159 = weight(_text_:des in 8863) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014638159 = score(doc=8863,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.079736836 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.18358089 = fieldWeight in 8863, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=8863)
    0.00706341 = weight(_text_:in in 8863) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00706341 = score(doc=8863,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 8863, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=8863)
  0.1 = coord(2/20)
    Abstract
    Based on the works of Aristotle, Ramon Lull, I. Kant and the experiences with relationships published in the works of S.R. Ranganathan, E.de Grolier, J. Mills, J.C. Costello, E. Wall, R. Pagès, A. Leroy, P. Braffort, M. Kervégant, J.C. Gardin and J. Farradane, categories and relationships were collected, analyzed, grouped and classified in a triadic way so that a scheme resulted by which 120 relationships could be defined and identified by their positions and their codes. The exercise was meant to create and supply a tool for the replacement of the non-significant relation symbol, the colon, in the UDC by a letter code which could express the actual relationship contained in a classificatory statement. Examples for their application illustrate different cases occuring
    Footnote
    Reprint von: Rev. Int. Doc. 32(1965) no.4, S.136-144; dto. als FID/CR report no.4 u. im Buch des Verf.: Towards a theory for UDC. London: Bingley 1969, S.119-148
  14. Gnoli, C.: Classifying phenomena : part 4: themes and rhemes (2018) 0.00 
    0.0021047199 = product of:
  0.0210472 = sum of:
    0.009344013 = weight(_text_:in in 4152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009344013 = score(doc=4152,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.23857531 = fieldWeight in 4152, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4152)
    0.011703186 = product of:
      0.023406371 = sum of:
        0.023406371 = weight(_text_:22 in 4152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023406371 = score(doc=4152,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10082839 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02879306 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4152, 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=4152)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.1 = coord(2/20)
    Abstract
    This is the fourth in a series of papers on classification based on phenomena instead of disciplines. Together with types, levels and facets that have been discussed in the previous parts, themes and rhemes are further structural components of such a classification. In a statement or in a longer document, a base theme and several particular themes can be identified. Base theme should be cited first in a classmark, followed by particular themes, each with its own facets. In some cases, rhemes can also be expressed, that is new information provided about a theme, converting an abstract statement ("wolves, affected by cervids") into a claim that some thing actually occurs ("wolves are affected by cervids"). In the Integrative Levels Classification rhemes can be expressed by special deictic classes, including those for actual specimens, anaphoras, unknown values, conjunctions and spans, whole universe, anthropocentric favoured classes, and favoured host classes. These features, together with rules for pronounciation, make a classification of phenomena a true language, that may be suitable for many uses.
    Date
    17. 2.2018 18:22:25
  15. Winske, E.: ¬The development and structure of an urban, regional, and local documents classification scheme (1996) 0.00 
    0.0020790326 = product of:
  0.020790325 = sum of:
    0.0071366085 = weight(_text_:in in 7241) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0071366085 = score(doc=7241,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.1822149 = fieldWeight in 7241, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7241)
    0.013653717 = product of:
      0.027307434 = sum of:
        0.027307434 = weight(_text_:22 in 7241) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027307434 = score(doc=7241,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10082839 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02879306 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 7241, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7241)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.1 = coord(2/20)
    Abstract
    Discusses the reasons for the decision, taken at Florida International University Library to develop an in house classification system for their local documents collections. Reviews the structures of existing classification systems, noting their strengths and weaknesses in relation to the development of an in house system and describes the 5 components of the new system; geography, subject categories, extensions for population group and/or function, extensions for type of publication, and title/series designator
    Footnote
    Paper presented at conference on 'Local documents, a new classification scheme' at the Research Caucus of the Florida Library Association Annual Conference, Fort Lauderdale, Florida 22 Apr 95
  16. Olson, H.A.: Sameness and difference : a cultural foundation of classification (2001) 0.00 
    0.0020790326 = product of:
  0.020790325 = sum of:
    0.0071366085 = weight(_text_:in in 166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0071366085 = score(doc=166,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.1822149 = fieldWeight in 166, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=166)
    0.013653717 = product of:
      0.027307434 = sum of:
        0.027307434 = weight(_text_:22 in 166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027307434 = score(doc=166,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10082839 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02879306 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 166, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=166)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.1 = coord(2/20)
    Abstract
    The idea of sameness is used to gather material in classifications. However, it is also used to separate what is different. Sameness and difference as guiding principles of classification seem obvious but are actually fundamental characteristics specifically related to Western culture. Sameness is not a singular factor, but has the potential to represent multiple characteristics or facets. This article explores the ramifications of which characteristics are used to define classifications and in what order. It explains the primacy of division by discipline, its origins in Western philosophy, and the cultural specificity that results. The Dewey Decimal Classification is used as an example throughout.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  17. Howarth, L.C.; Jansen, E.H.: Towards a typology of warrant for 21st century knowledge organization systems (2014) 0.00 
    0.001960032 = product of:
  0.019600319 = sum of:
    0.007897133 = weight(_text_:in in 1425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007897133 = score(doc=1425,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.20163295 = fieldWeight in 1425, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1425)
    0.011703186 = product of:
      0.023406371 = sum of:
        0.023406371 = weight(_text_:22 in 1425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023406371 = score(doc=1425,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10082839 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02879306 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1425, 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=1425)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.1 = coord(2/20)
    Abstract
    This paper returns to Beghtol's (1986) insightful typology of warrant to consider an empirical example of a traditional top-down hierarchical classification system as it continues to evolve in the early 21st century. Our examination considers there may be multiple warrants identified among the processes of design and the relationships to users of the National Occupational Classification (NOC), the standard occupational classification system published in Canada. We argue that this shift in semantic warrant signals a transition for traditional knowledge organization systems, and that warrant continues to be a relevant analytical concept and organizing principle, both within and beyond the domain of bibliographic control.
    Series
    Advances in knowledge organization; vol. 14
    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
  18. Dousa, T.M.: Categories and the architectonics of system in Julius Otto Kaiser's method of systematic indexing (2014) 0.00 
    0.0019059516 = product of:
  0.019059516 = sum of:
    0.009306861 = weight(_text_:in in 1418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009306861 = score(doc=1418,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.2376267 = fieldWeight in 1418, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1418)
    0.009752655 = product of:
      0.01950531 = sum of:
        0.01950531 = weight(_text_:22 in 1418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01950531 = score(doc=1418,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10082839 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02879306 = 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)
  0.1 = coord(2/20)
    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.
    Series
    Advances in knowledge organization; vol. 14
    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
  19. Feibleman, J.K.: Theory of integrative levels (1985) 0.00 
    0.0018877598 = product of:
  0.018877598 = sum of:
    0.009758773 = weight(_text_:des in 3637) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009758773 = score(doc=3637,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.079736836 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.12238726 = fieldWeight in 3637, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3637)
    0.009118824 = weight(_text_:in in 3637) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009118824 = score(doc=3637,freq=30.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.23282567 = fieldWeight in 3637, product of:
          5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
            30.0 = termFreq=30.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3637)
  0.1 = coord(2/20)
    Abstract
    In the early 1960s, the Classification Research Group in London (q.v.) had reached the point in its experimentation with faceted classification systems where some kind of amalgamation of individual schemes was needed. They sought a unifying principle or set of principles that would provide a basis for a general system. The individual faceted schemes would not merge; what was central to one subject was fringe to another, but the fringes did not coalesce. In looking farther afield, they discovered the theory of "integrative levels" set forth by James K. Feibleman, Chairman and Professor of Philosophy at Tulane University until 1969 and author of forty-five books and more than 175 articles in various fields of philosophy. Feibleman's research concerned the development of the sciences considered in terms of an organizing principle. In the physical sciences, one Gould begin with subparticles and work up to atoms, molecules, and molecular assemblages, interpolating the biological equivalents. Feibleman separates the various levels by use of a "no return" device: "each level organizes the level or levels below it plus one emergent quality." The process is not reversible without loss of identity. A dog, in his system, is no longer a dog when it has been run over by a car; the smashed parts cannot be put together again to function as a dog. The theory of integrative levels is an interesting one. The levels from subparticles to clusters of galaxies or from nuclei to organisms are relatively clearly defined. A discipline, such as any of the ones comprising the "hard sciences," is made up of integrative levels. Research is cumulative so that scholars are ready to contribute when very young. Classification in these fields can make good use of the theory of integrative levels-in fact it should do so. It would appear that the method is more difficult to apply in the social sciences and humanities. This appearance may, however, be superficial. Almost all past happenings are irrevocable; one cannot recall the French Revolution and re-fight it. Any academic discipline that moves an over time does not usually return to an earlier position, even when there are schools of thought involved. Philosophy may have "neo-" this or that, but the subsequent new is not the same as the previous new. One has only to look at the various kinds of neo-Platonists that arise from time to time to realize that. Physical science recognizes a series of paradigms in changing its methodology over time and a similar situation may also turn out to be true in cognitive science." If this should turn out to be the case, integrative levels would probably have a part in that field as weIl.
    Footnote
    Nachdruck des Originalartikels mit Kommentierung durch die Herausgeber
    Original in: British journal for the philosophy of science 5(1954) S.59-66.
  20. Jacob, E.K.: Proposal for a classification of classifications built on Beghtol's distinction between "Naïve Classification" and "Professional Classification" (2010) 0.00 
    0.0018766596 = product of:
  0.018766595 = sum of:
    0.00706341 = weight(_text_:in in 2945) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00706341 = score(doc=2945,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 2945, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2945)
    0.011703186 = product of:
      0.023406371 = sum of:
        0.023406371 = weight(_text_:22 in 2945) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023406371 = score(doc=2945,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10082839 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02879306 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2945, 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=2945)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.1 = coord(2/20)
    Abstract
    Argues that Beghtol's (2003) use of the terms "naive classification" and "professional classification" is valid because they are nominal definitions and that the distinction between these two types of classification points up the need for researchers in knowledge organization to broaden their scope beyond traditional classification systems intended for information retrieval. Argues that work by Beghtol (2003), Kwasnik (1999) and Bailey (1994) offer direction for the development of a classification of classifications based on the pragmatic dimensions of extant classification systems. Bezugnahme auf: Beghtol, C.: Naïve classification systems and the global information society. In: Knowledge organization and the global information society: Proceedings of the 8th International ISKO Conference 13-16 July 2004, London, UK. Ed.: I.C. McIlwaine. Würzburg: Ergon Verlag 2004. S.19-22. (Advances in knowledge organization; vol.9)
    Content
    Beitrag in einem Special issue: A Festschrift for Clare Beghtol

Authors

Years

Types

  • a 165
  • m 22
  • el 8
  • s 4
  • b 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications