Search (8 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Sauperl, A."
  1. Sauperl, A.; Say, J.D.: When 'surfing' the Web isn't good enough : providing access to electronic resources (2001) 0.02
    0.021456998 = product of:
      0.042913996 = sum of:
        0.042913996 = product of:
          0.08582799 = sum of:
            0.08582799 = weight(_text_:web in 6951) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08582799 = score(doc=6951,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052098576 = queryNorm
                0.50479853 = fieldWeight in 6951, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6951)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
  2. Sauperl, A.; Rozman, D.: Subject cataloguing at the crossroads : with or without subject heading strings? (2007) 0.02
    0.017646596 = product of:
      0.03529319 = sum of:
        0.03529319 = product of:
          0.07058638 = sum of:
            0.07058638 = weight(_text_:22 in 245) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07058638 = score(doc=245,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18244034 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052098576 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 245, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=245)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Knjiznice za prihodnost : napredek in sodelovanje : zbornik referatov [ Libraries for the future : development and collaboration: proceedings / Professional conference of Union of associations of Slovene Librarians], Portoroz, October 22-23, 2007; ed. M. Ambrozic
  3. Sauperl, A.; Saye, J.D.: Pebbles for the mosais of cataloging expertise : what do problems in expert systems for cataloging reveal about cataloging expertise? (1999) 0.01
    0.010587957 = product of:
      0.021175914 = sum of:
        0.021175914 = product of:
          0.042351827 = sum of:
            0.042351827 = weight(_text_:22 in 103) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.042351827 = score(doc=103,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18244034 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052098576 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 103, 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=103)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  4. Sauperl, A.: Precoordination or not? : a new view of the old question (2009) 0.01
    0.008823298 = product of:
      0.017646596 = sum of:
        0.017646596 = product of:
          0.03529319 = sum of:
            0.03529319 = weight(_text_:22 in 3611) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03529319 = score(doc=3611,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18244034 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052098576 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3611, 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=3611)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    20. 6.2010 14:22:43
  5. Sauperl, A.; Saye, J.D.: Have we made any progress? : catalogues of the future revisited (2009) 0.01
    0.007663213 = product of:
      0.015326426 = sum of:
        0.015326426 = product of:
          0.030652853 = sum of:
            0.030652853 = weight(_text_:web in 2843) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.030652853 = score(doc=2843,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052098576 = queryNorm
                0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 2843, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2843)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - Library online public access catalogues (OPACs) are considered to be unattractive in comparison with popular internet sites. In 2000, the authors presented some suggestions on how library catalogues should change. Have librarians actually made their OPACs more user-friendly by adopting techniques and technologies already present in other information resources? This paper aims to address these issues. Design/methodology/approach - The characteristics of four OPACs, one online bookstore and two internet search engines are analyzed. The paper reviews some of the changes and directions suggested by researchers and adds some of authors own. All this is in the hope that library catalogues will survive "Google attack." Findings - Changes are identified in the information services studied over a seven-year period. Least development is found in library catalogues. Suggestions are made for library catalogues of the future. Research limitations/implications - A library catalogue, a web search engine and an internet bookstore cannot be compared directly because of differences in scope. But features from each could be fruitfully used in others. Practical implications - OPACs must be both attractive and useful. They should be at least as easy to use as their competitors. With the results of research as well as the knowledge librarians have many years, the profession should be able to develop better OPACs than we have today and regain lost ground in the "competition" for those with information needs. Originality/value - A comparison of OPAC features in 2000 and 2007, even if subjective, can provide a panoramic view of the development of the field.
  6. Sauperl, A.: UDC and Folksonomies (2010) 0.01
    0.007663213 = product of:
      0.015326426 = sum of:
        0.015326426 = product of:
          0.030652853 = sum of:
            0.030652853 = weight(_text_:web in 4069) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.030652853 = score(doc=4069,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052098576 = queryNorm
                0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 4069, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4069)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Social tagging systems, known as "folksonomies," represent an important part of web resource discovery as they enable free and unrestricted browsing through information space. Folksonomies consisting of subject designators (tags) assigned by users, however, have one important drawback: they do not express semantic relationships, either hierarchical or associative, between tags. As a consequence, the use of tags to browse information resources requires moving from one resource to another, based on coincidence and not on the pre-established meaningful or logical connections that may exist between related resources. We suggest that the semantic structure of the Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) may be used in complementing and supporting tag-based browsing. In this work, two specific questions were investigated: 1) Are terms used as tags in folksonomies included in the UDC?; and, 2) Which facets of UDC match the characteristics of documents or information objects that are tagged in folksonomies? A collection of the most popular tags from Amazon, LibraryThing, Delicious, and 43Things was investigated. The universal nature of UDC was examined through the universality of topics and facets covering diverse human interests which are at the same time interconnected and form a rich and intricate semantic structure. The results suggest that UDC-supported folksonomies could be implemented in resource discovery, in particular in library portals and catalogues.
  7. Sauperl, A.: Pinning down a novel : characteristics of literary works as perceived by readers (2012) 0.01
    0.007663213 = product of:
      0.015326426 = sum of:
        0.015326426 = product of:
          0.030652853 = sum of:
            0.030652853 = weight(_text_:web in 4548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.030652853 = score(doc=4548,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052098576 = queryNorm
                0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 4548, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4548)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - The subject description of novels in library catalogues is traditionally limited to the classification number with no description of the story. On the other hand, enthusiastic readers describe novels by tags or reviews in Web services. The purpose of this paper is to analyse readers' descriptions of novels and suggest an enhancement of the catalogue record which would be useful to the readers. Design/methodology/approach - The original research involved a content analysis of tags and reviews written by users in the online bookstore Amazon.com, the online reader advisory service LibraryThing, and the reading promotion project Primorci beremo. The results were compared to previously published results. Findings - The characteristics that most frequently elicit comments by readers are: the names of the creators and literary characters, geographic names and the titles of works, the time frame in which the story takes place, and the literary genre. Their evaluation of a novel was expressed with an opinion, an analysis, or a professional review. Awards were mentioned, and readers often also expressed their personal experience with the novel. They connected the novel with a sequel or series, with otherwise related novels, movies, etc. Often, pictures of the cover and other factual data were included. Research limitations/implications - Research was limited to readers' experiences and descriptions of literary works written in prose. Practical implications - It is suggested that the time frame, genre and awards received should be included in the functional requirements models. Originality/value - Original research was conducted over a longer period of time. The results were re-evaluated and compared to previously published results from studies by different researchers.
  8. Sauperl, A.: Subject determination during the cataloging process : the development of a system based on theoretical principles (2002) 0.01
    0.0052939784 = product of:
      0.010587957 = sum of:
        0.010587957 = product of:
          0.021175914 = sum of:
            0.021175914 = weight(_text_:22 in 2293) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.021175914 = score(doc=2293,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18244034 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052098576 = queryNorm
                0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 2293, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2293)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    27. 9.2005 14:22:19