Search (34 results, page 2 of 2)

  • × theme_ss:"Klassifikationstheorie: Elemente / Struktur"
  1. Howarth, L.C.; Jansen, E.H.: Towards a typology of warrant for 21st century knowledge organization systems (2014) 0.00
    0.0011038391 = product of:
      0.01324607 = sum of:
        0.01324607 = product of:
          0.02649214 = sum of:
            0.02649214 = weight(_text_:22 in 1425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02649214 = score(doc=1425,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.032588977 = 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)
      0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    
    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
  2. Vukadin, A.; Slavic, A.: Challenges of facet analysis and concept placement in Universal Classifications : the example of architecture in UDC (2014) 0.00
    0.0011038391 = product of:
      0.01324607 = sum of:
        0.01324607 = product of:
          0.02649214 = sum of:
            0.02649214 = weight(_text_:22 in 1428) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02649214 = score(doc=1428,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.032588977 = 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)
      0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    
    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
  3. Gnoli, C.: Classifying phenomena : part 4: themes and rhemes (2018) 0.00
    0.0011038391 = product of:
      0.01324607 = sum of:
        0.01324607 = product of:
          0.02649214 = sum of:
            0.02649214 = weight(_text_:22 in 4152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02649214 = score(doc=4152,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.032588977 = 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)
      0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    
    Date
    17. 2.2018 18:22:25
  4. Mai, J.-E.: Is classification theory possible? : Rethinking classification research (2003) 0.00
    0.0010460628 = product of:
      0.012552753 = sum of:
        0.012552753 = weight(_text_:internet in 2759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012552753 = score(doc=2759,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032588977 = queryNorm
            0.1304718 = fieldWeight in 2759, 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=2759)
      0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    
    Abstract
    1. Introduction Theoretical context independent explanations of classification could enhance the universality of classification research and make knowledge about classification available to settings other than traditional libraries. There is a tremendous need for constructing classificatory structures in a range of settings many of which are far removed from the environment in which classification theory and research has been practiced in the last century and a half. The construction of classificatory structures an the Internet, intranets, and in knowledge management systems has received some attention lately. The question examined here is whether it is possible to create a single theory of classification that applies to the range of contexts in which classificatory structures are applied. The object of this paper is to question the assumption that bibliographic classification theory can resemble scientific theories. It is argued that the context of any classification influences the use and understanding of the classification to such a degree that the classification cannot be understood separate from its context. Furthermore, the development from being a novice classifier or classificationist to becoming an expert is explored. lt is assumed scientific theories must relate as much to the activity of novices as to the activity of experts and that scientific theories explain both what it is that novices do and what experts do. It is argued that expertise is achieved not through a correct application of a classification theory but through experiences and adjustment to a particular context and that the activities of novices are quite distinct from the activities of experts in that experts draws an the context of the situation and that novices do not. 2. Theory of Classification Langridge (1976) provides an account of the principles of constructing knowledge organization systems and the theoretical underpinnings of different approaches. He identifies four principles that have guided construction of knowledge organization systems: 1) ideological, 2) social purpose, 3) scientific, and 4) the disciplines. The ideological principle organizes knowledge according to an ideology that the knowledge organization system serves. Langridge gives the examples of "the Christian schemes of the Middle Ages and the Soviet scheme which substitutes for the Bible and Christianity the works of Marx and Lenin and the 'religion' of communism" (Langridge, 1976, p. 4-5).
  5. Putkey, T.: Using SKOS to express faceted classification on the Semantic Web (2011) 0.00
    0.0010460628 = product of:
      0.012552753 = sum of:
        0.012552753 = weight(_text_:internet in 311) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012552753 = score(doc=311,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032588977 = queryNorm
            0.1304718 = fieldWeight in 311, 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=311)
      0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    
    Abstract
    This paper looks at Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS) to investigate how a faceted classification can be expressed in RDF and shared on the Semantic Web. Statement of the Problem Faceted classification outlines facets as well as subfacets and facet values. Hierarchical relationships and associative relationships are established in a faceted classification. RDF is used to describe how a specific URI has a relationship to a facet value. Not only does RDF decompose "information into pieces," but by incorporating facet values RDF also given the URI the hierarchical and associative relationships expressed in the faceted classification. Combining faceted classification and RDF creates more knowledge than if the two stood alone. An application understands the subjectpredicate-object relationship in RDF and can display hierarchical and associative relationships based on the object (facet) value. This paper continues to investigate if the above idea is indeed useful, used, and applicable. If so, how can a faceted classification be expressed in RDF? What would this expression look like? Literature Review This paper used the same articles as the paper A Survey of Faceted Classification: History, Uses, Drawbacks and the Semantic Web (Putkey, 2010). In that paper, appropriate resources were discovered by searching in various databases for "faceted classification" and "faceted search," either in the descriptor or title fields. Citations were also followed to find more articles as well as searching the Internet for the same terms. To retrieve the documents about RDF, searches combined "faceted classification" and "RDF, " looking for these words in either the descriptor or title.
  6. Beghtol, C.: Naïve classification systems and the global information society (2004) 0.00
    9.19866E-4 = product of:
      0.011038392 = sum of:
        0.011038392 = product of:
          0.022076784 = sum of:
            0.022076784 = weight(_text_:22 in 3483) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.022076784 = score(doc=3483,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.032588977 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3483, 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=3483)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    
    Pages
    S.19-22
  7. Dousa, T.M.; Ibekwe-SanJuan, F.: Epistemological and methodological eclecticism in the construction of knowledge organization systems (KOSs) : the case of analytico-synthetic KOSs (2014) 0.00
    9.19866E-4 = product of:
      0.011038392 = sum of:
        0.011038392 = product of:
          0.022076784 = sum of:
            0.022076784 = weight(_text_:22 in 1417) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.022076784 = score(doc=1417,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.032588977 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1417, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1417)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    
    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
  8. Dousa, T.M.: Categories and the architectonics of system in Julius Otto Kaiser's method of systematic indexing (2014) 0.00
    9.19866E-4 = product of:
      0.011038392 = sum of:
        0.011038392 = product of:
          0.022076784 = sum of:
            0.022076784 = weight(_text_:22 in 1418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.022076784 = score(doc=1418,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.032588977 = 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)
      0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    
    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
  9. Zhang, J.; Zeng, M.L.: ¬A new similarity measure for subject hierarchical structures (2014) 0.00
    9.19866E-4 = product of:
      0.011038392 = sum of:
        0.011038392 = product of:
          0.022076784 = sum of:
            0.022076784 = weight(_text_:22 in 1778) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.022076784 = score(doc=1778,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.032588977 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1778, 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=1778)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    
    Date
    8. 4.2015 16:22:13
  10. Green, R.: Relational aspects of subject authority control : the contributions of classificatory structure (2015) 0.00
    9.19866E-4 = product of:
      0.011038392 = sum of:
        0.011038392 = product of:
          0.022076784 = sum of:
            0.022076784 = weight(_text_:22 in 2282) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.022076784 = score(doc=2282,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.032588977 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2282, 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=2282)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    
    Date
    8.11.2015 21:27:22
  11. Qin, J.: Evolving paradigms of knowledge representation and organization : a comparative study of classification, XML/DTD and ontology (2003) 0.00
    7.358928E-4 = product of:
      0.008830713 = sum of:
        0.008830713 = product of:
          0.017661426 = sum of:
            0.017661426 = weight(_text_:22 in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.017661426 = score(doc=2763,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.032588977 = queryNorm
                0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2763, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2763)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    
    Date
    12. 9.2004 17:22:35
  12. Wang, Z.; Chaudhry, A.S.; Khoo, C.S.G.: Using classification schemes and thesauri to build an organizational taxonomy for organizing content and aiding navigation (2008) 0.00
    7.358928E-4 = product of:
      0.008830713 = sum of:
        0.008830713 = product of:
          0.017661426 = sum of:
            0.017661426 = weight(_text_:22 in 2346) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.017661426 = score(doc=2346,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.032588977 = queryNorm
                0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2346, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2346)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    
    Date
    7.11.2008 15:22:04
  13. Denton, W.: Putting facets on the Web : an annotated bibliography (2003) 0.00
    6.5378926E-4 = product of:
      0.007845471 = sum of:
        0.007845471 = weight(_text_:internet in 2467) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007845471 = score(doc=2467,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032588977 = queryNorm
            0.081544876 = fieldWeight in 2467, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2467)
      0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    
    Abstract
    Consider movie listings in newspapers. Most Canadian newspapers list movie showtimes in two large blocks, for the two major theatre chains. The listings are ordered by region (in large cities), then theatre, then movie, and finally by showtime. Anyone wondering where and when a particular movie is playing must scan the complete listings. Determining what movies are playing in the next half hour is very difficult. When movie listings went onto the web, most sites used a simple faceted organization, always with movie name and theatre, and perhaps with region or neighbourhood (thankfully, theatre chains were left out). They make it easy to pick a theatre and see what movies are playing there, or to pick a movie and see what theatres are showing it. To complete the system, the sites should allow users to browse by neighbourhood and showtime, and to order the results in any way they desired. Thus could people easily find answers to such questions as, "Where is the new James Bond movie playing?" "What's showing at the Roxy tonight?" "I'm going to be out in in Little Finland this afternoon with three hours to kill starting at 2 ... is anything interesting playing?" A hypertext, faceted classification system makes more useful information more easily available to the user. Reading the books and articles below in chronological order will show a certain progression: suggestions that faceting and hypertext might work well, confidence that facets would work well if only someone would make such a system, and finally the beginning of serious work on actually designing, building, and testing faceted web sites. There is a solid basis of how to make faceted classifications (see Vickery in Recommended), but their application online is just starting. Work on XFML (see Van Dijck's work in Recommended) the Exchangeable Faceted Metadata Language, will make this easier. If it follows previous patterns, parts of the Internet community will embrace the idea and make open source software available for others to reuse. It will be particularly beneficial if professionals in both information studies and computer science can work together to build working systems, standards, and code. Each can benefit from the other's expertise in what can be a very complicated and technical area. One particularly nice thing about this area of research is that people interested in combining facets and the web often have web sites where they post their writings.
  14. Broughton, V.: Essential classification (2004) 0.00
    5.230314E-4 = product of:
      0.0062763765 = sum of:
        0.0062763765 = weight(_text_:internet in 2824) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0062763765 = score(doc=2824,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032588977 = queryNorm
            0.0652359 = fieldWeight in 2824, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2824)
      0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    
    Footnote
    Essential Classification is also an exercise book. Indeed, it contains a number of practical exercises and activities in every chapter, along with suggested answers. Unfortunately, the answers are too often provided without the justifications and explanations that students would no doubt demand. The author has taken great care to explain all technical terms in her text, but formal definitions are also gathered in an extensive 172-term Glossary; appropriately, these terms appear in bold type the first time they are used in the text. A short, very short, annotated bibliography of standard classification textbooks and of manuals for the use of major classification schemes is provided. A detailed 11-page index completes the set of learning aids which will be useful to an audience of students in their effort to grasp the basic concepts of the theory and the practice of document classification in a traditional environment. Essential Classification is a fine textbook. However, this reviewer deplores the fact that it presents only a very "traditional" view of classification, without much reference to newer environments such as the Internet where classification also manifests itself in various forms. In Essential Classification, books are always used as examples, and we have to take the author's word that traditional classification practices and tools can also be applied to other types of documents and elsewhere than in the traditional library. Vanda Broughton writes, for example, that "Subject headings can't be used for physical arrangement" (p. 101), but this is not entirely true. Subject headings can be used for physical arrangement of vertical files, for example, with each folder bearing a simple or complex heading which is then used for internal organization. And if it is true that subject headings cannot be reproduced an the spine of [physical] books (p. 93), the situation is certainly different an the World Wide Web where subject headings as metadata can be most useful in ordering a collection of hot links. The emphasis is also an the traditional paperbased, rather than an the electronic version of classification schemes, with excellent justifications of course. The reality is, however, that supporting organizations (LC, OCLC, etc.) are now providing great quality services online, and that updates are now available only in an electronic format and not anymore on paper. E-based versions of classification schemes could be safely ignored in a theoretical text, but they have to be described and explained in a textbook published in 2005. One last comment: Professor Broughton tends to use the same term, "classification" to represent the process (as in classification is grouping) and the tool (as in constructing a classification, using a classification, etc.). Even in the Glossary where classification is first well-defined as a process, and classification scheme as "a set of classes ...", the definition of classification scheme continues: "the classification consists of a vocabulary (...) and syntax..." (p. 296-297). Such an ambiguous use of the term classification seems unfortunate and unnecessarily confusing in an otherwise very good basic textbook an categorization of concepts and subjects, document organization and subject representation."