Search (7 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Social tagging"
  • × theme_ss:"Folksonomies"
  1. Peters, I.: Folksonomies und kollaborative Informationsdienste : eine Alternative zur Websuche? (2011) 0.00
    0.0020921256 = product of:
      0.025105506 = sum of:
        0.025105506 = weight(_text_:internet in 343) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025105506 = score(doc=343,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032588977 = queryNorm
            0.2609436 = fieldWeight in 343, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=343)
      0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    
    Source
    Handbuch Internet-Suchmaschinen, 2: Neue Entwicklungen in der Web-Suche. Hrsg.: D. Lewandowski
  2. Munk, T.B.; Moerk, K.: Folksonomies, tagging communities, and tagging strategies : an empirical study (2007) 0.00
    0.0018491952 = product of:
      0.022190342 = sum of:
        0.022190342 = weight(_text_:internet in 1091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022190342 = score(doc=1091,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032588977 = queryNorm
            0.23064373 = fieldWeight in 1091, 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=1091)
      0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    
    Abstract
    The subject of this article is folksonomies on the Internet. One of the largest folksonomies on the Internet in terms of number of users and tagged websites is the computer program del.icio.us, where more than 100,000 people have tagged the websites that they and others find using their own keywords. How this is done in practice and the patterns to be found are the focus of this article. The empirical basis is the collection of 76,601 different keywords with a total frequency of 178,215 from 500 randomly chosen taggers on del.icio.us at the end of 2005. The keywords collected were then analyzed quantitatively statistically by uncovering their frequency and percentage distribution and through a statistical correspondence analysis in order to uncover possible patterns in the users' tags. Subsequently, a qualitative textual analysis of the tags was made in order to find out by analysis which tagging strategies are represented in the data material. This led to four conclusions. 1) the distribution of keywords follows classic power law; 2) distinct tagging communities are identifiable; 3) the most frequently used tags are situated on a general-specific axis; and 4) nine distinct tagging strategies are observed. These four conclusions are put into perspective collectively in respect of a number of more general and theoretical considerations concerning folksonomies and the classification systems of the future.
  3. Watters, C.; Nizam, N.: Knowledge organization on the Web : the emergent role of social classification (2012) 0.00
    0.0018306099 = product of:
      0.021967318 = sum of:
        0.021967318 = weight(_text_:internet in 828) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021967318 = score(doc=828,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032588977 = queryNorm
            0.22832564 = fieldWeight in 828, 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=828)
      0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    
    Abstract
    There are close to a billion websites on the Internet with approximately 400 million users worldwide [www.internetworldstats.com]. People go to websites for a wide variety of different information tasks, from finding a restaurant to serious research. Many of the difficulties with searching the Web, as it is structured currently, can be attributed to increases to scale. The content of the Web is now so large that we only have a rough estimate of the number of sites and the range of information is extremely diverse, from blogs and photos to research articles and news videos.
  4. Rafferty, P.: Tagging (2018) 0.00
    0.0018306099 = product of:
      0.021967318 = sum of:
        0.021967318 = weight(_text_:internet in 4647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021967318 = score(doc=4647,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032588977 = queryNorm
            0.22832564 = fieldWeight in 4647, 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=4647)
      0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    
    Abstract
    This article examines tagging as knowledge organization. Tagging is a kind of indexing, a process of labelling and categorizing information made to support resource discovery for users. Social tagging generally means the practice whereby internet users generate keywords to describe, categorise or comment on digital content. The value of tagging comes when social tags within a collection are aggregated and shared through a folksonomy. This article examines definitions of tagging and folksonomy, and discusses the functions, advantages and disadvantages of tagging systems in relation to knowledge organization before discussing studies that have compared tagging and conventional library-based knowledge organization systems. Approaches to disciplining tagging practice are examined and tagger motivation discussed. Finally, the article outlines current research fronts.
  5. Shirky, C.: Ontology is overrated : categories, links, and tags (2005) 0.00
    0.0013075785 = product of:
      0.015690941 = sum of:
        0.015690941 = weight(_text_:internet in 1265) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015690941 = score(doc=1265,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032588977 = queryNorm
            0.16308975 = fieldWeight in 1265, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1265)
      0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    
    Series
    Clay Shirky's writings about the Internet
  6. Catarino, M.E.; Baptista, A.A.: Relating folksonomies with Dublin Core (2008) 0.00
    0.001300887 = product of:
      0.015610643 = sum of:
        0.015610643 = product of:
          0.031221285 = sum of:
            0.031221285 = weight(_text_:22 in 2652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031221285 = score(doc=2652,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.032588977 = queryNorm
                0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 2652, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2652)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    
    Pages
    S.14-22
    Source
    Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
  7. Kim, H.L.; Scerri, S.; Breslin, J.G.; Decker, S.; Kim, H.G.: ¬The state of the art in tag ontologies : a semantic model for tagging and folksonomies (2008) 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 2650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.022076784 = score(doc=2650,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.032588977 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2650, 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=2650)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    
    Source
    Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas