Search (249 results, page 1 of 13)

  • × theme_ss:"Klassifikationstheorie: Elemente / Struktur"
  1. Gnoli, C.: Classifying phenomena : part 3: facets (2017) 0.06 
    0.057715505 = product of:
  0.17314652 = sum of:
    0.007585147 = weight(_text_:a in 4158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007585147 = score(doc=4158,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.049617026 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043031227 = queryNorm
        0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 4158, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4158)
    0.16556136 = weight(_text_:68 in 4158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16556136 = score(doc=4158,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.23180789 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.386969 = idf(docFreq=549, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043031227 = queryNorm
        0.71421796 = fieldWeight in 4158, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.386969 = idf(docFreq=549, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4158)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Pages
    S.55-68
    Type
    a
  2. Rescheleit, W.; Menner, L.: Vergleich der Wissensrepräsentationssprache FRL mit Dezimalklassifikation und Facettenklassifikation (1986) 0.03 
    0.028857753 = product of:
  0.08657326 = sum of:
    0.0037925735 = weight(_text_:a in 1555) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0037925735 = score(doc=1555,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.049617026 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043031227 = queryNorm
        0.07643694 = fieldWeight in 1555, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1555)
    0.08278068 = weight(_text_:68 in 1555) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08278068 = score(doc=1555,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.23180789 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.386969 = idf(docFreq=549, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043031227 = queryNorm
        0.35710898 = fieldWeight in 1555, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.386969 = idf(docFreq=549, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1555)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Pages
    S.68-76
    Type
    a
  3. Buchanan, B.: Bibliothekarische Klassifikationstheorie (1989) 0.03 
    0.028806064 = product of:
  0.17283638 = sum of:
    0.17283638 = weight(_text_:kritische in 3921) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17283638 = score(doc=3921,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2900761 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.7410603 = idf(docFreq=141, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043031227 = queryNorm
        0.59583116 = fieldWeight in 3921, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.7410603 = idf(docFreq=141, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3921)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Content
    Inhalt: Klassifikation: Definition und Einsatzmöglichkeiten - Die verschiedenen Arten von Klassenbeziehungen - Präkombinierte Klassifikationssysteme und Facettenklassifikationen - Methodische Überlegungen zur Lösung von Ordnungsproblemen - Konstruktion einer Facettenklassifikation, 1. Teil - Konstruktion einer Facettenklassifikation, 2. Teil - Gestaltung des Notationssystems, 1. Teil - Gestaltung des Notationssystems, 2. Teil - Gestaltung des Notationssystems, 3. Teil - Das alphabetische Sachregister - Universalklassifikationen - Kritische Anmerkungen zur systematischen Ordnung - Automatische Indexierung
  4. Maniez, J.: ¬Des classifications aux thesaurus : du bon usage des facettes (1999) 0.01 
    0.014188657 = product of:
  0.042565968 = sum of:
    0.007585147 = weight(_text_:a in 6404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007585147 = score(doc=6404,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.049617026 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043031227 = queryNorm
        0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 6404, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6404)
    0.034980822 = product of:
      0.069961645 = sum of:
        0.069961645 = weight(_text_:22 in 6404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.069961645 = score(doc=6404,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15068802 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043031227 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6404, 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=6404)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Date
    1. 8.1996 22:01:00
    Type
    a
  5. Maniez, J.: ¬Du bon usage des facettes : des classifications aux thésaurus (1999) 0.01 
    0.014188657 = product of:
  0.042565968 = sum of:
    0.007585147 = weight(_text_:a in 3773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007585147 = score(doc=3773,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.049617026 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043031227 = queryNorm
        0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 3773, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3773)
    0.034980822 = product of:
      0.069961645 = sum of:
        0.069961645 = weight(_text_:22 in 3773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.069961645 = score(doc=3773,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15068802 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043031227 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3773, 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=3773)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Date
    1. 8.1996 22:01:00
    Type
    a
  6. Foskett, D.J.: Systems theory and its relevance to documentary classification (2017) 0.01 
    0.014188657 = product of:
  0.042565968 = sum of:
    0.007585147 = weight(_text_:a in 3176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007585147 = score(doc=3176,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.049617026 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043031227 = queryNorm
        0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 3176, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3176)
    0.034980822 = product of:
      0.069961645 = sum of:
        0.069961645 = weight(_text_:22 in 3176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.069961645 = score(doc=3176,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15068802 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043031227 = 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)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Date
    6. 5.2017 18:46:22
    Type
    a
  7. Hjoerland, B.: ¬The classification of psychology : a case study in the classification of a knowledge field (1998) 0.01 
    0.013764037 = product of:
  0.04129211 = sum of:
    0.0083856955 = weight(_text_:a in 3783) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0083856955 = score(doc=3783,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.049617026 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043031227 = queryNorm
        0.16900843 = fieldWeight in 3783, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3783)
    0.032906413 = product of:
      0.065812826 = sum of:
        0.065812826 = weight(_text_:psychologie in 3783) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.065812826 = score(doc=3783,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25314224 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8827567 = idf(docFreq=334, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043031227 = queryNorm
            0.25998357 = fieldWeight in 3783, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.8827567 = idf(docFreq=334, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3783)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    Different approaches to the classification of a knowledge field include empiristic, rationalistic, historistic, and pragmatic methods. This paper demonstrates how these different methids have been applied to the classification of psychology. An etymological apporach is insufficient to define the subject matter of psychology, because other terms can be used to describe the same domain. To define the subject matter of psychology from the point of view of its formal establishment as a science and academic discipline (in Leipzig, 1879) it is also insufficient because this was done in specific historical circumstances, which narrowed the subject matter to physiologically-related issues. When defining the subject area of a scientific field it is necessary to consider how different ontological and epistemological views have made their influences. A subject area and the approaches by which this subject area has been studied cannot be separated from each other without tracing their mutual historical interactions. The classification of a subject field is theory-laden and thus cannot be neutral or ahistorical. If classification research can claim to have a method that is more general than the study of concrete developments in the single knowledge fields the key is to be found in the general epistemological theories. It is shown how basic epistemological assumptions have formed the different approaches to psychology during the 20th century. The progress in the understanding of basic philosophical questions is decisive both for the development of a knowledge field and as the point of departure of classification. The theoretical principles developed in this paper are applied in a brief analysis of some concrete classification systems, including the one used by PsycINFO / Psychologcal Abstracts. The role of classification in modern information retrieval is also briefly discussed
    Field
    Psychologie
    Type
    a
  8. Engelien, G.: ¬Der Begriff der Klassifikation (1971) 0.01 
    0.0137110045 = product of:
  0.082266025 = sum of:
    0.082266025 = product of:
      0.16453205 = sum of:
        0.16453205 = weight(_text_:psychologie in 3386) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.16453205 = score(doc=3386,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25314224 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8827567 = idf(docFreq=334, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043031227 = queryNorm
            0.6499589 = fieldWeight in 3386, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.8827567 = idf(docFreq=334, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3386)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Content
    1. Wortgeschichte, Terminologie - 2. Überblick über die zitierte Literatur - 3. Klassifikatorische Elementarprinzipien - 3.1 Die Psychologie betreffend - 3.2 Die Logik betreffend - 3.3 Die Philosophie betreffend (h.a. bibl. KS) - 3.4 Die Sprachwissenschaft betreffend - 3.5 Die Ähnlichkeit - 3.6 Die Relation - 4. Angewandte Klassifikation - 5. Automatische Klassifikation - 6. Darstellung
  9. Belayche, C.: ¬A propos de la classification de Dewey (1997) 0.01 
    0.010693042 = product of:
  0.032079123 = sum of:
    0.008758574 = weight(_text_:a in 1171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008758574 = score(doc=1171,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.049617026 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043031227 = queryNorm
        0.17652355 = fieldWeight in 1171, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1171)
    0.023320548 = product of:
      0.046641096 = sum of:
        0.046641096 = weight(_text_:22 in 1171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046641096 = score(doc=1171,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15068802 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043031227 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1171, 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=1171)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    All classifications are based on ideologies and Dewey is marked by its author's origins in 19th century North America. Subsequent revisions indicate changed ways of understanding the world. Section 157 (psycho-pathology) is now included with 616.89 (mental troubles), reflecting the move to a genetic-based approach. Table 5 (racial, ethnic and national groups) is however unchanged, despite changing views on such categorisation
    Source
    Bulletin d'informations de l'Association des Bibliothecaires Francais. 1997, no.175, S.22-23
    Type
    a
  10. Connaway, L.S.; Sievert, M.C.: Comparison of three classification systems for information on health insurance (1996) 0.01 
    0.010157298 = product of:
  0.030471893 = sum of:
    0.0071513453 = weight(_text_:a in 7242) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0071513453 = score(doc=7242,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.049617026 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043031227 = queryNorm
        0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 7242, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7242)
    0.023320548 = product of:
      0.046641096 = sum of:
        0.046641096 = weight(_text_:22 in 7242) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046641096 = score(doc=7242,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15068802 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043031227 = 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)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    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
    Type
    a
  11. Gnoli, C.: Classifying phenomena : part 4: themes and rhemes (2018) 0.01 
    0.010022986 = product of:
  0.030068956 = sum of:
    0.012578544 = weight(_text_:a in 4152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012578544 = score(doc=4152,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.049617026 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043031227 = queryNorm
        0.25351265 = fieldWeight in 4152, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4152)
    0.017490411 = product of:
      0.034980822 = sum of:
        0.034980822 = weight(_text_:22 in 4152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034980822 = score(doc=4152,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15068802 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043031227 = 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)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    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
    Type
    a
  12. Lin, W.-Y.C.: ¬The concept and applications of faceted classifications (2006) 0.01 
    0.009459104 = product of:
  0.028377313 = sum of:
    0.0050567645 = weight(_text_:a in 5083) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0050567645 = score(doc=5083,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.049617026 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043031227 = queryNorm
        0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 5083, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5083)
    0.023320548 = product of:
      0.046641096 = sum of:
        0.046641096 = weight(_text_:22 in 5083) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046641096 = score(doc=5083,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15068802 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043031227 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5083, 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=5083)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Date
    27. 5.2007 22:19:35
    Type
    a
  13. Lorenz, B.: Zur Theorie und Terminologie der bibliothekarischen Klassifikation (2018) 0.01 
    0.009459104 = product of:
  0.028377313 = sum of:
    0.0050567645 = weight(_text_:a in 4339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0050567645 = score(doc=4339,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.049617026 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043031227 = queryNorm
        0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 4339, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4339)
    0.023320548 = product of:
      0.046641096 = sum of:
        0.046641096 = weight(_text_:22 in 4339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046641096 = score(doc=4339,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15068802 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043031227 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4339, 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=4339)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Pages
    S.1-22
    Type
    a
  14. Kwasnik, B.H.: ¬The role of classification in knowledge representation (1999) 0.01 
    0.009405809 = product of:
  0.028217427 = sum of:
    0.010727017 = weight(_text_:a in 2464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010727017 = score(doc=2464,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.049617026 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043031227 = queryNorm
        0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 2464, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2464)
    0.017490411 = product of:
      0.034980822 = sum of:
        0.034980822 = weight(_text_:22 in 2464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034980822 = score(doc=2464,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15068802 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043031227 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2464, 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=2464)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    A fascinating, broad-ranging article about classification, knowledge, and how they relate. Hierarchies, trees, paradigms (a two-dimensional classification that can look something like a spreadsheet), and facets are covered, with descriptions of how they work and how they can be used for knowledge discovery and creation. Kwasnick outlines how to make a faceted classification: choose facets, develop facets, analyze entities using the facets, and make a citation order. Facets are useful for many reasons: they do not require complete knowledge of the entire body of material; they are hospitable, flexible, and expressive; they do not require a rigid background theory; they can mix theoretical structures and models; and they allow users to view things from many perspectives. Facets do have faults: it can be hard to pick the right ones; it is hard to show relations between them; and it is difficult to visualize them. The coverage of the other methods is equally thorough and there is much to consider for anyone putting a classification on the web.
    Source
    Library trends. 48(1999) no.1, S.22-47
    Type
    a
  15. Olson, H.A.: Sameness and difference : a cultural foundation of classification (2001) 0.01 
    0.009356411 = product of:
  0.028069232 = sum of:
    0.007663752 = weight(_text_:a in 166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007663752 = score(doc=166,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.049617026 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043031227 = queryNorm
        0.1544581 = fieldWeight in 166, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=166)
    0.020405479 = product of:
      0.040810958 = sum of:
        0.040810958 = weight(_text_:22 in 166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040810958 = score(doc=166,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15068802 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043031227 = 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)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    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
    Type
    a
  16. Winske, E.: ¬The development and structure of an urban, regional, and local documents classification scheme (1996) 0.01 
    0.008887636 = product of:
  0.026662907 = sum of:
    0.0062574274 = weight(_text_:a in 7241) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0062574274 = score(doc=7241,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.049617026 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043031227 = queryNorm
        0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 7241, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7241)
    0.020405479 = product of:
      0.040810958 = sum of:
        0.040810958 = weight(_text_:22 in 7241) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040810958 = score(doc=7241,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15068802 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043031227 = 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)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    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
    Type
    a
  17. Howarth, L.C.; Jansen, E.H.: Towards a typology of warrant for 21st century knowledge organization systems (2014) 0.01 
    0.008656955 = product of:
  0.025970865 = sum of:
    0.008480453 = weight(_text_:a in 1425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008480453 = score(doc=1425,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.049617026 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043031227 = queryNorm
        0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 1425, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1425)
    0.017490411 = product of:
      0.034980822 = sum of:
        0.034980822 = weight(_text_:22 in 1425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034980822 = score(doc=1425,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15068802 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043031227 = 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)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    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.
    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
    Type
    a
  18. Vukadin, A.; Slavic, A.: Challenges of facet analysis and concept placement in Universal Classifications : the example of architecture in UDC (2014) 0.01 
    0.008656955 = product of:
  0.025970865 = sum of:
    0.008480453 = weight(_text_:a in 1428) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008480453 = score(doc=1428,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.049617026 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043031227 = queryNorm
        0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 1428, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1428)
    0.017490411 = product of:
      0.034980822 = sum of:
        0.034980822 = weight(_text_:22 in 1428) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034980822 = score(doc=1428,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15068802 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043031227 = 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)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    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.
    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
    Type
    a
  19. Slavic, A.: On the nature and typology of documentary classifications and their use in a networked environment (2007) 0.01 
    0.0083585195 = product of:
  0.025075559 = sum of:
    0.007585147 = weight(_text_:a in 780) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007585147 = score(doc=780,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.049617026 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043031227 = queryNorm
        0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 780, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=780)
    0.017490411 = product of:
      0.034980822 = sum of:
        0.034980822 = weight(_text_:22 in 780) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034980822 = score(doc=780,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15068802 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043031227 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 780, 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=780)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    Networked orientated standards for vocabulary publishing and exchange and proposals for terminological services and terminology registries will improve sharing and use of all knowledge organization systems in the networked information environment. This means that documentary classifications may also become more applicable for use outside their original domain of application. The paper summarises some characteristics common to documentary classifications and explains some terminological, functional and implementation aspects. The original purpose behind each classification scheme determines the functions that the vocabulary is designed to facilitate. These functions influence the structure, semantics and syntax, scheme coverage and format in which classification data are published and made available. The author suggests that attention should be paid to the differences between documentary classifications as these may determine their suitability for a certain purpose and may impose different requirements with respect to their use online. As we speak, many classifications are being created for knowledge organization and it may be important to promote expertise from the bibliographic domain with respect to building and using classification systems.
    Date
    22.12.2007 17:22:31
    Type
    a
  20. Jacob, E.K.: Proposal for a classification of classifications built on Beghtol's distinction between "Naïve Classification" and "Professional Classification" (2010) 0.01 
    0.0083585195 = product of:
  0.025075559 = sum of:
    0.007585147 = weight(_text_:a in 2945) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007585147 = score(doc=2945,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.049617026 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043031227 = queryNorm
        0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 2945, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2945)
    0.017490411 = product of:
      0.034980822 = sum of:
        0.034980822 = weight(_text_:22 in 2945) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034980822 = score(doc=2945,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15068802 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043031227 = 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)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    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
    Type
    a

Authors

Years

Languages

Types

  • a 221
  • m 21
  • el 10
  • s 4
  • b 1
  • d 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications