Search (1898 results, page 1 of 95)

0.18222827 = product of:
  0.72891307 = sum of:
    0.72891307 = weight(_text_:judaica in 620) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.72891307 = score(doc=620,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.5417902 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.610425 = idf(docFreq=21, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        1.3453789 = fieldWeight in 620, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          8.610425 = idf(docFreq=21, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=620)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to discuss the second edition of the Encyclopaedia Judaica (2007) within its broader historical context of the production of encyclopedias in the twentieth and the twenty-first centuries. The paper contrasts the 2007 edition of the Encyclopaedia Judaica to the Jewish Encyclopedia published between 1901 and 1905, and to the first edition of the Encyclopaedia Judaica published in 1972; then contrasts the 2007 edition of the Encyclopaedia Judaica to Wikipedia and to other projects of online encyclopedias. Design/methodology/approach - The paper provides a personal reflective review of the sources in question. Findings - That Encyclopaedia Judaica in its latest edition does not adequately replace the original first edition in terms of depth of scholarly work. It is considered that the model offered by Wikipedia could work well for the Encyclopaedia Judaica, allowing it to retain the core of the expert knowledge, and at the same time channel the energy of volunteer editors which has made Wikipedia such a success. Practical implications - The paper is of interest to those with an interest in encyclopedia design or Jewish studies. Originality/value - This paper provides a unique reflection on the latest edition of the encyclopedia and considers future models for its publication based on traditional and non-traditional methods.

Object

Encyclopedia Judaica

0.08924209 = product of:
  0.17848419 = sum of:
    0.051296335 = weight(_text_:und in 1652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.051296335 = score(doc=1652,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.13955593 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.36756828 = fieldWeight in 1652, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1652)
    0.12718785 = weight(_text_:heading in 1652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12718785 = score(doc=1652,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.334162 = fieldWeight in 1652, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1652)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Die Welt der Information ist zunehmend vernetzt. Quellen aller Art werden in digitaler Form über das Internet verbreitet. Die inhaltliche Erschließung dieser Quellen durch Schlagwörter bietet dem Nutzer, insbesondere dem Wissenschaftler, einen unentbehrlichen thematischen Zugang zu diesen Quellen. Die "Regeln für den Schlagwortkatalog" (RSWK) sind das maßgebende Regelwerk für die verbale Inhaltserschließung im deutschsprachigen Raum. Sie sind zugleich in der bibliotheks- und informationswissenschaftlichen Fachwelt kontrovers diskutiert worden. Dennoch fehlt bislang eine wissenschaftliche monographische Darstellung der RSWK. Die Arbeit will einen Beitrag dazu leisten, indem sie die durch dieses Regelwerk bestimmte Indexierungssprache als Zeichensystem in seiner semantischen, syntaktischen und pragmatischen Dimension analysiert. Die theoretische Grundlage der Arbeit bietet die Semiotik von Charles Morris. Ausgehend davon wird der Typus der Indexierungssprache unter zeichentheoretischen Gesichtspunkten dargestellt. Für die konkrete Analyse der RSWK als Schlagwortsprache werden dann zwei auf der internationalen Ebene der bibliothekarischen Wissensorganisation vorgelegte Unternehmungen als Analyseinstrumente herangezogen, nämlich einmal die "Functional requirements for bibliographic records" (FRBR und zum anderen die "Principles underlying subject heading languages" Gestützt auf die Ergebnisse dieser Untersuchungen wird die RSWK als Schlagwortsprache im Hinblick auf ihre theoretische Angemessenheit und Konsistenz untersucht. Die Analyse kennzeichnet die RSWK als synthetische kettenbildende Schlagwortsprache mit ihren drei charakteristischen Ebenen: dem Schlagwort, der Schlagwortkette und dem Indexat als der Gesamtheit der Schlagwortketten. Es werden semiotische Defizite dieser Schlagwortsprache im Hinblick auf ihre Vollständigkeit und Widerspruchsfreiheit aufgezeigt und entsprechende Vorschläge für ihre Weiterentwicklung gewonnen. Weitere Abschnitte widmen sich dann einzelnen Schlagwortkategorien und den durch sie repräsentierten bibliographischen Entitäten: den Körperschaften, den Ereignissen und den Werken.

0.08657198 = product of:
  0.17314395 = sum of:
    0.020518534 = weight(_text_:und in 788) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020518534 = score(doc=788,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13955593 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.14702731 = fieldWeight in 788, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=788)
    0.15262543 = weight(_text_:heading in 788) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.15262543 = score(doc=788,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.40099442 = fieldWeight in 788, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=788)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

In the last few years projects such as DESIRE, MACS, CrissCross and KoMoHe have demonstrated the benefits as well as the challenges of mapping between controlled vocabularies. Each project has taken a slightly different approach to the definition and implementation of appropriate types of mapping. The mapping types supported by SKOS are slightly different again. In an ideal world, all major databases would be interconnected; all widely used thesauri, classification schemes and subject heading schemes would map to each other; and all of us would use the same basic types of mapping to enable universal interoperability. Or would we? This paper will discuss the feasibility and desirability of agreeing and implementing standardized mapping types.

Series

Bibliotheca Academica - Reihe Informations- und Bibliothekswissenschaften; Bd. 1

0.072143316 = product of:
  0.14428663 = sum of:
    0.017098779 = weight(_text_:und in 3794) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017098779 = score(doc=3794,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13955593 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.12252277 = fieldWeight in 3794, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3794)
    0.12718785 = weight(_text_:heading in 3794) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12718785 = score(doc=3794,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.334162 = fieldWeight in 3794, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3794)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

This paper reviews Ranganathan's description of subject from mathematical angle. Ranganathan was highly influenced by Nineteenth Century mathematician George Cantor and he used the concept of infinity in developing an axiomatic interpretation of subject. Majority of library scientists interpreted the concept of subject merely as a term or descriptor or heading to include the same in cataloguing and subject indexing. Some library scientists interpreted subject on the basis of document, i.e. from the angle of the concept of aboutness or epistemological potential of the document etc. Some people explained subject from the viewpoint of social, cultural or socio-cultural process. Attempts were made to describe subject from epistemological viewpoint. But S R Ranganathan was the first to develop an axiomatic concept of subject on its own. He built up an independent idea of subject that is ubiquitously pervasive with human cognition process. To develop the basic foundation of subject, he used the mathematical concepts of infinity and infinitesimal and construed the set of subjects or universe of subjects as continuous infinite universe. The subject may also exist in extremely micro-form, which was termed as spot subject and analogized with point, which is dimensionless having only an existence. The influence of Twentieth Century physicist George Gamow on Ranganathan's thought has also been discussed.

Footnote

Beitrag in einem Themenheft zu Leben und Werk von S.R. Ranganathan.

0.072143316 = product of:
  0.14428663 = sum of:
    0.017098779 = weight(_text_:und in 3797) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017098779 = score(doc=3797,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13955593 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.12252277 = fieldWeight in 3797, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3797)
    0.12718785 = weight(_text_:heading in 3797) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12718785 = score(doc=3797,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.334162 = fieldWeight in 3797, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3797)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

This paper analyses the scholarly contribution of S R Ranganathan as reflected in Google Scholar Citations, Web of Science, and Scopus. This paper also identifies popularity of his published works, particularly which are highly referred by the researchers and LIS curriculum designers. His top three highly cited books are namely Prolegomena to Library Classification, The Five Laws of Library Science, and Colon Classification. His top three highly referred journal articles are titled "Hidden Roots of Classification", "Subject Heading and Facet Analysis", and "Colon Classification Edition 7 (1971): A Preview". This paper identifies the articles that cited his works extensively and got considerable citations from the other researchers. Top citing journal articles are namely "The Need for a Faceted Classification as the Basis of All Methods of Information Retrieval", "Ranganathan and the Net: Using Facet Analysis to Search and Organise the World Wide Web" and "Grounded Classification: Grounded Theory and Faceted Classification". These citing articles also indicate that Ranganathan is very relevant to today's researchers in interdisciplinary areas, particularly which belong to the fields of computer applications and information systems.

Footnote

Beitrag in einem Themenheft zu Leben und Werk von S.R. Ranganathan.

0.06608874 = product of:
  0.26435497 = sum of:
    0.26435497 = weight(_text_:heading in 844) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.26435497 = score(doc=844,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.6945427 = fieldWeight in 844, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=844)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Sears List of Subject Headings (Miller and McCarthy 2010), first published in 1923, is now in its 20th edition. Like most subject headings lists, apart from being a list of preferred (and non-preferred) headings, it also provides patterns, clear instructions, and examples for coining new subject headings not explicitly listed. Key headings form a vital part of the system of coining new headings. It is proposed that more key headings should be designated. Some candidate headings are described. One far-reaching provision seems to be the use of a subdivision of a preferred heading with all of its NTs. Thus, every preferred heading is a potential key heading for all of its NTs. This proposal works on the principle that what is true of a class is true of its narrower classes of all types. Applying this principle will enormously enhance the capacity of the List without adding even an iota to its text and size.

0.062954776 = product of:
  0.2518191 = sum of:
    0.2518191 = weight(_text_:heading in 167) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2518191 = score(doc=167,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.661607 = fieldWeight in 167, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=167)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This article argues that the use of the Library of Congress subject heading "East Indians" in reference to individuals from India represents not only a problematic vestige of colonialism, but also a failure of the principle of literary warrant. It provides an overview of the term's historical roots and then examines whether the term is still widely used in published resources. Although assigning a subject heading is not easy and can involve a choice between contested realities of diverse peoples, the author contends that a rejection of outdated terminology is central to providing any culturally sensitive tool for resource organization.

0.05087514 = product of:
  0.20350055 = sum of:
    0.20350055 = weight(_text_:heading in 2809) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.20350055 = score(doc=2809,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.5346592 = fieldWeight in 2809, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2809)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.05087514 = product of:
  0.20350055 = sum of:
    0.20350055 = weight(_text_:heading in 3014) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.20350055 = score(doc=3014,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.5346592 = fieldWeight in 3014, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3014)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Cataloging practices for video games have been in flux since the late 1970s, often lagging behind technological developments. This article describes the history of descriptive cataloging practices and MARC coding for video games. Also discussed are the special problems presented by Library of Congress subject heading and uniform title practice, which were developed for book cataloging rather than for the cataloging of video games themselves.

0.044967696 = product of:
  0.17987078 = sum of:
    0.17987078 = weight(_text_:heading in 1472) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17987078 = score(doc=1472,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.47257644 = fieldWeight in 1472, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1472)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The following paper deals with an automatic text classification method which does not require training documents. For this method the German Subject Heading Authority File (SWD), provided by the linked data service of the German National Library is used. Recently the SWD was enriched with notations of the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC). In consequence it became possible to utilize the subject headings as textual representations for the notations of the DDC. Basically, we we derive the classification of a text from the classification of the words in the text given by the thesaurus. The method was tested by classifying 3826 OAI-Records from 7 different repositories. Mean reciprocal rank and recall were chosen as evaluation measure. Direct comparison to a machine learning method has shown that this method is definitely competitive. Thus we can conclude that the enriched version of the SWD provides high quality information with a broad coverage for classification of German scientific articles.

0.044967696 = product of:
  0.17987078 = sum of:
    0.17987078 = weight(_text_:heading in 3294) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17987078 = score(doc=3294,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.47257644 = fieldWeight in 3294, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3294)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

From the very beginnings of library automation, subject authority control has been considered an important bibliographic tool in the Czech National Library (CNL). Effective subject access cannot exist without standardised access points. Subject authorities are considered an indispensable reference tool in supporting the selection of subject access points and normalizing content indexing. Most importantly, they are heavily relied upon when it comes to customisation of links between bibliographic records and subject access points in order to create a user-friendly subject browsing and searching environment. Because of the fact that the Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) is widely used in Czech Libraries it has become a readily available language independent subject framework which can be complemented by a more user-friendly subject heading system. In this context, the subject authority control offers a means of enhancing subject headings' access points with terminology and the semantic links available in UDC. Furthermore classification is used to enrich relationships between authority records themselves. The author will discuss in more detail the different aspects and advantages of subject authorities in which a classification and a subject heading system complement one another and the way this is implemented in the CNL.

0.044515748 = product of:
  0.17806299 = sum of:
    0.17806299 = weight(_text_:heading in 1827) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17806299 = score(doc=1827,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.4678268 = fieldWeight in 1827, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1827)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

"dwibindu vargiikaraNa" is the Kannada rendering of the revised Colon Classification, 7th Edition, intended essentially for the classification of macro documents. This paper discusses the planning, preparation, and features of Colon Classification (CC) in Kannada, one of the major Indian languages as well as the Official Language of Karnataka, and uploading the CC on the web. Linguistic issues related to the Kannada rendering are discussed with possible solutions. It creates facilities in the field of Indexing Language (IL) to prepare products such as, Subject Heading List, Information Retrieval Thesaurus, and creation of subject glossaries or updating the available subject dictionaries in Kannada.

0.044515748 = product of:
  0.17806299 = sum of:
    0.17806299 = weight(_text_:heading in 3599) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17806299 = score(doc=3599,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.4678268 = fieldWeight in 3599, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3599)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The US cataloging community is an interorganizational network with the Library of Congress (LC) as the lead organization, which reserves to itself the power to shape cataloging rules. Peripheral members of the network who are interested in modifying changes to the rules or to the network can use various strategies for organizational change that incorporate building ties to the decision-makers located at the hub of the network. The story of William E. Studwell's campaign for a subject heading code illustrates how some traditional scholarly methods of urging change-papers and presentations-are insufficient to achieve reform in an interorganizational network, absent strategies to build alliances with the decision makers.

0.044515748 = product of:
  0.17806299 = sum of:
    0.17806299 = weight(_text_:heading in 529) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17806299 = score(doc=529,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.4678268 = fieldWeight in 529, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=529)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This article examines the classification of migration and the political implications of its vocabulary. It begins with an analysis of the challenge that the topic of migration poses to traditional methods of classification. These challenges are evident in the case study of the 2016 petition to change the subject heading of "Illegal aliens" at the Library of Congress, the Library's proposal to replace the term with "noncitizens" and "illegal immigration," and subsequent pressure from the House of Representatives to reinstate the original phrasing in order to match the terminology of federal laws.

0.044515748 = product of:
  0.17806299 = sum of:
    0.17806299 = weight(_text_:heading in 122) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17806299 = score(doc=122,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.4678268 = fieldWeight in 122, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=122)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This research concerns the frequency of the assignment of author-supplied keyword strings and cataloger supplied subject heading strings within a library catalog. The results reveal that, on average, more author-assigned keywords and more cataloger-assigned Library of Congress Subject Headings were assigned to works emerging from the arts & humanities than to works emerging from the social sciences and science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines. STEM disciplines in particular received a lower amount of topical metadata, in part because of the under-assignment of name/title, geographical, and corporate subject headings. These findings reveal how librarians could increase their understanding of how topical access is functioning within academic disciplines.

0.038156357 = product of:
  0.15262543 = sum of:
    0.15262543 = weight(_text_:heading in 2124) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.15262543 = score(doc=2124,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.40099442 = fieldWeight in 2124, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2124)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

We are in 2013, and multiword expressions have been around for a while in the computational linguistics research community. Since the first ACL workshop on MWEs 12 years ago in Sapporo, Japan, much has been discussed, proposed, experimented, evaluated and argued about MWEs. And yet, they deserve the publication of a whole special issue of the ACM Transactions on Speech and Language Processing. But what is it about multiword expressions that keeps them in fashion? Who are the people and the institutions who perform and publish groundbreaking fundamental and applied research in this field? What is the place and the relevance of our lively research community in the bigger picture of computational linguistics? Where do we come from as a community, and most importantly, where are we heading? In this introductory article, we share our point of view about the answers to these questions and introduce the articles that compose the current special issue.

0.038156357 = product of:
  0.15262543 = sum of:
    0.15262543 = weight(_text_:heading in 4893) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.15262543 = score(doc=4893,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.40099442 = fieldWeight in 4893, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4893)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

In 2017, the University of Virginia (U.Va.) will launch a two year initiative to celebrate the bicentennial anniversary of the University's founding in 1819. The U.Va. Library is participating in this event by digitizing some 20,000 photographs and negatives that document student life on the U.Va. grounds in the 1960s and 1970s. Metadata librarians and archivists are well-versed in the challenges associated with generating digital content and accompanying description within the context of limited resources. This paper describes how technology and new approaches to metadata design have enabled the University of Virginia's Metadata Analysis and Design Department to rapidly and successfully generate accurate description for these digital objects. Python's pandas module improves efficiency by cleaning and repurposing data recorded at digitization, while the lxml module builds MODS XML programmatically from CSV tables. A simplified technique for subject heading selection and assignment in Google Sheets provides a collaborative environment for streamlined metadata creation and data quality control.

0.038156357 = product of:
  0.15262543 = sum of:
    0.15262543 = weight(_text_:heading in 575) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.15262543 = score(doc=575,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.40099442 = fieldWeight in 575, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=575)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The fundamental principle of order in the library catalogue is the authorship principle, which serves as the organizing node of an alphabetico-classed system, in which "texts" of "works" are organized first alphabetically by uniform title of the progenitor work and then are subarranged using titles for variant instantiations, under the heading for an "author." We analyze case studies of entries from (1) the first documented imperial library catalogue, the Seven Epitomes (Qilue [??]), in China; (2) Abelard's Works, which featured prominently in the 1848 testimony of Antonio Panizzi; and (3) The French Chef and the large family of instantiated works associated with it. Our analysis shows that the catalogue typically contains many large superwork sets. A more pragmatic approach to the design of catalogues is to array descriptions of resources in relation to the superwork sets to which they might belong. In all cases, a multidimensional faceted arrangement incorporating ideational nodes from the universe of recorded knowledge holds promise for greatly enhanced retrieval capability.

0.031796962 = product of:
  0.12718785 = sum of:
    0.12718785 = weight(_text_:heading in 92) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12718785 = score(doc=92,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.334162 = fieldWeight in 92, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=92)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD) conceptual model identifies entities, attributes and relationships as they relate to subject authority data. FRSAD includes two main entities, thema (any entity used as a subject of a work) and nomen (any sign or sequence of signs that a thema is known by, referred to, or addressed as). In a given controlled vocabulary and within a domain, a nomen is the appellation of only one thema. The authors consider the question, can the FRSAD conceptual model be extended beyond controlled vocabularies (its original focus) to model classification data? Models that are developed based on the structures and functions of controlled vocabularies (such as thesauri and subject heading systems) often need to be adjusted or extended to accommodate classification systems that have been developed with different focused functions, structures and fundamental theories. The Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) system is used as a case study to test applicability of the FRSAD model for classification data, and as a springboard for a general discussion of issues related to the use of FRSAD for the representation of classification data.

0.031796962 = product of:
  0.12718785 = sum of:
    0.12718785 = weight(_text_:heading in 824) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12718785 = score(doc=824,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38061732 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06292258 = queryNorm
        0.334162 = fieldWeight in 824, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=824)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

General concepts are all those form-categorial concepts which - attached to a specific concept of a classification system or thesaurus - can help to widen, sometimes even in a syntactical sense, the understanding of a case. In some existing universal classification systems such concepts have been named "auxiliaries" or "common isolates" as in the Colon Classification (CC). However, by such auxiliaries, different kinds of such concepts are listed, e.g. concepts of space and time, concepts of races and languages and concepts of kinds of documents, next to them also concepts of kinds of general activities, properties, persons, and institutions. Such latter kinds form part of the nine aspects ruling the facets in the Information Coding Classification (ICC) through the principle of using a Systematiser for the subdivision of subject groups and fields. Based on this principle and using and extending existing systems of such concepts, e.g. which A. Diemer had presented to the German Thesaurus Committee as well as those found in the UDC, in CC and attached to the Subject Heading System of the German National Library, a faceted classification is proposed for critical assessment, necessary improvement and possible later use in classification systems and thesauri.