-
Dextre Clarke, S.G.: Teil 1 der Thesaurus-Norm ISO 25964 veröffentlicht (2012)
0.00
0.0040856022 = product of:
0.049027227 = sum of:
0.049027227 = product of:
0.098054454 = sum of:
0.098054454 = weight(_text_:vernetzung in 176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.098054454 = score(doc=176,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20326729 = queryWeight, product of:
6.237302 = idf(docFreq=234, maxDocs=44218)
0.032588977 = queryNorm
0.48239172 = fieldWeight in 176, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.237302 = idf(docFreq=234, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=176)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
- Abstract
- Die neue internationale Thesaurus-Norm ISO 25964-1 ersetzt die Normen ISO 2788 und ISO 5964. Ihr englischer Titel lautet "Information and documentation - Thesauri and interoperability with other vocabularies - Part 1: Thesauri for information retrieval". Die Norm umfasst ein- und mehrsprachige Thesauri und berück sichtigt die Notwendigkeit von Datenaustausch, Vernetzung und Interoperabilität. Zu den Inhalten gehören - Konstruktion ein- und mehrsprachiger Thesauri - Unterschied zwischen Begriff und Benennung und ihren Beziehungen - Facettenanalyse und Layout - Einsatz von Thesauri in computergestützten und vernetzten Systemen - Management und Pflege von Thesauri - Richtlinien für Thesaurusmanagement-Software - Datenmodell für ein- und mehrsprachige Thesauri - Empfehlungen
-
Dextre Clarke, S.G.: Challenges and opportunities for KOS standards (2007)
0.00
0.0025756247 = product of:
0.030907497 = sum of:
0.030907497 = product of:
0.061814994 = sum of:
0.061814994 = weight(_text_:22 in 4643) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.061814994 = score(doc=4643,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.032588977 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4643, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4643)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
- Date
- 22. 9.2007 15:41:14
-
Dextre Clarke, S.G.: Origins and trajectory of the long thesaurus debate (2016)
0.00
0.0018491952 = product of:
0.022190342 = sum of:
0.022190342 = weight(_text_:internet in 2913) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022190342 = score(doc=2913,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
0.032588977 = queryNorm
0.23064373 = fieldWeight in 2913, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2913)
0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
- Abstract
- The information retrieval thesaurus emerged in the 1950s, settled down to a more-or-less standard format in the 1970s and has continued to evolve marginally since then. Throughout its whole lifetime, doubts have been expressed about its efficacy with emphasis latterly on cost-effectiveness. Prolonged testing of different styles of index language in the 1970s failed to settle the doubts. The arena occupied by the debate has moved from small isolated databases in the post-war era to diverse situations nowadays with the whole Internet at one extreme and small in-house collections at the other. Sophisticated statistical techniques now dominate the retrieval landscape on the Internet but leave opportunities for the thesaurus and other knowledge organization techniques in niches such as image libraries and corporate intranets. The promise of an ontology-driven semantic web with linked data resources opens another opportunity. Thus much scope remains for research to establish the usefulness of the thesaurus in these places and to inspire its continuing evolution.
-
Dextre Clarke, S.G.: Knowledge organization system standards (2009)
0.00
0.0018306099 = product of:
0.021967318 = sum of:
0.021967318 = weight(_text_:internet in 3833) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021967318 = score(doc=3833,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
0.032588977 = queryNorm
0.22832564 = fieldWeight in 3833, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3833)
0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
- Abstract
- This entry presents an overview of the standards for different types of knowledge organization system (KOS). Their development history and the principles within them are described. Standards for thesauri receive most attention, since other types of KOS are less standardized. The arrival of the Internet, enabling simultaneous access to multiple disparate systems and resources, caused a major reorientation of standardization efforts in the last decade, towards interoperability goals. Current initiatives address two main needs: interoperability between KOSs, and data exchange between one vocabulary application and another. The prospects for bringing the standards together are discussed.
-
Dextre Clarke, S.G.: Thesaural relationships (2001)
0.00
0.0012878124 = product of:
0.015453748 = sum of:
0.015453748 = product of:
0.030907497 = sum of:
0.030907497 = weight(_text_:22 in 1149) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030907497 = score(doc=1149,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.032588977 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1149, 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=1149)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
- Date
- 22. 9.2007 15:45:57
-
Dextre Clarke, S.G.: Evolution towards ISO 25964 : an international standard with guidelines for thesauri and other types of controlled vocabulary (2007)
0.00
0.0012878124 = product of:
0.015453748 = sum of:
0.015453748 = product of:
0.030907497 = sum of:
0.030907497 = weight(_text_:22 in 749) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030907497 = score(doc=749,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.032588977 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 749, 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=749)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
- Date
- 8.12.2007 19:25:22
-
Dextre Clarke, S.G.: Thesauri, topics and other structures in knowledge management software (2000)
0.00
0.0011038391 = product of:
0.01324607 = sum of:
0.01324607 = product of:
0.02649214 = sum of:
0.02649214 = weight(_text_:22 in 102) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02649214 = score(doc=102,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.032588977 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 102, 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=102)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
- Date
- 22. 9.2007 15:45:45
-
Aitchison, J.; Dextre Clarke, S.G.: ¬The Thesaurus : a historical viewpoint, with a look to the future (2004)
0.00
0.0011038391 = product of:
0.01324607 = sum of:
0.01324607 = product of:
0.02649214 = sum of:
0.02649214 = weight(_text_:22 in 5005) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02649214 = score(doc=5005,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.032588977 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5005, 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=5005)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
- Date
- 22. 9.2007 15:46:13
-
Dextre Clarke, S.G.; Gilchrist, A.; Will, L.: Revision and extension of thesaurus standards (2004)
0.00
0.0010460628 = product of:
0.012552753 = sum of:
0.012552753 = weight(_text_:internet in 2615) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012552753 = score(doc=2615,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
0.032588977 = queryNorm
0.1304718 = fieldWeight in 2615, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2615)
0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
- Abstract
- The current standards for monolingual and multilingual thesauri are long overdue for an update. This applies to the international standards ISO 2788 and ISO 5964, as well as the corresponding national standards in several countries and the American standard ANSI/NISO Z39.19. Work is now under way in the UK and in the USA to revise and extend the standards, with particular emphasis on interoperability needs in our world of vast electronic networks. Work in the UK is starting with the British Standards, in the hope of leading on to one international standard to serve all. Some of the issues still under discussion include the treatment of facet analysis, coverage of additional types of controlled vocabulary such as classification schemes, taxonomies and ontologies, and mapping from one vocabulary to another. 1. Are thesaurus standards still needed? Since the 1960s, even before the renowned Cranfield experiments (Cleverdon et al., 1966; Cleverdon, 1967) arguments have raged over the usefulness or otherwise of controlled vocabularies. The case has never been proved definitively one way or the other. At the same time, a recognition has become widespread that no one search method can answer all retrieval requirements. In today's environment of very large networks of resources, the skilled information professional uses a range of techniques. Among these, controlled vocabularies are valued alongside others. The first international standard for monolingual thesauri was issued in 1974. In those days, the main application was for postcoordinate indexing and retrieval from document collections or bibliographic databases. For many information professionals the only practicable alternative to a thesaurus was a classification scheme. And so the thesaurus developed a strong following. After computer systems with full text search capability became widely available, however, the arguments against controlled vocabularies gained more followers. The cost of building and maintaining a thesaurus or a classification scheme was a strong disincentive. Today's databases are typically immense compared with those three decades ago. Full text searching is taken for granted, not just in discrete databases but across all the resources in an intranet or even the Internet. But intranets have brought particular frustration as users discover that despite all the computer power, they cannot find items which they know to be present an the network. So the trend against controlled vocabularies is now being reversed, as many information professionals are turning to them for help. Standards to guide them are still in demand.
