Search (13434 results, page 1 of 672)

0.104039215 = product of:
  0.20807843 = sum of:
    0.02515288 = weight(_text_:und in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02515288 = score(doc=701,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12830718 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.19603643 = fieldWeight in 701, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=701)
    0.18292555 = weight(_text_:having in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18292555 = score(doc=701,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.52866447 = fieldWeight in 701, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=701)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Generally, open science practices are only slowly having an impact on mainstream archaeological practice. An exception is the open access to publications, which, together with open data and open methodologies may represent those practices most relevant for archaeological researchers. This article introduces a selection of archaeology projects that embrace and facilitate open science practices. Finally there will be a discussion of some of the questions and challenges the discipline is facing in its move towards an Open Archaeology.

Source

Mitteilungen der Vereinigung Österreichischer Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare. 72(2019) H.2-4, S.538-554

0.09682029 = product of:
  0.38728115 = sum of:
    0.38728115 = weight(_text_:judaic in 676) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.38728115 = score(doc=676,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.63683987 = queryWeight, product of:
          11.008321 = idf(docFreq=1, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.60812956 = fieldWeight in 676, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          11.008321 = idf(docFreq=1, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=676)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Derivative bibliographic relationships are the primary relationships that exist among the members of a bibliographic family--the set of interrelated works where the relationships among entities express shared semantic or linguistic activity. Derivative bibliographic relationships exist between any new conception of a work and its original source (the progenitor), or its successor, or both. Discipline was a poor predictor of derivative relationships in prior studies of derivative bibliographic relationships. For the present study random samples of works were drawn from the catalogs of the Bobst Library, New York University, and the Burke Library, Union Theological Seminary, New York. Two sites were chosen to allow a test of the differences in collection development patterns between a university research library and a theological library. Bibliographic families were compiled for each work. Results indicate: 1) derivative bibliographic relationships exist for somewhere between one-half and two-thirds of theological works in this study; 2) there is little difference in proportions of derivative bibliographic relationships or in the size of bibliographic families between the two collections; 3) there is a positive correlation between the age of the progenitor work and the size of the bibliographic family); 4) there are significant gaps in coverage of theological bibliographic families online; 5) there is some evidence of differing patterns of derivation between Judaic and Islamic literature and Christian literature; 5) forms and genres are useful in a limited way for predicting the incidence of derivative relationships in theological literature

0.091034316 = product of:
  0.18206863 = sum of:
    0.022008771 = weight(_text_:und in 3362) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022008771 = score(doc=3362,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12830718 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.17153187 = fieldWeight in 3362, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3362)
    0.16005985 = weight(_text_:having in 3362) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16005985 = score(doc=3362,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.4625814 = fieldWeight in 3362, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3362)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

It is discussed what is underlying the assumption of modality-specific processing systems and representations. Starting from the information processing approach relevant aspects of mental representations and their physiological realizations are discussed. Then 3 different forms of modality-specific systems are distinguished: as stimulus specific processing, as specific informational formats, and as modular part systems. Parallel to that 3 kinds of analogue systems are differentiated: as holding an analogue-relation, as having a specific informational format and as a set of specific processing constraints. These different aspects of the assumption of modality-specific systems are demonstrated in the example of visual and spatial information processing. It is concluded that postulating information-specific systems is not a superfluous assumption, but it is necessary, and even more likely it is inevitable consequence of an optimization of stimulus processing

0.08002993 = product of:
  0.3201197 = sum of:
    0.3201197 = weight(_text_:having in 7984) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.3201197 = score(doc=7984,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.9251628 = fieldWeight in 7984, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=7984)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

There's a big gap between simply having an Internet connection and making good use of it. Here's how to make the leap

0.068597086 = product of:
  0.27438834 = sum of:
    0.27438834 = weight(_text_:having in 5893) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.27438834 = score(doc=5893,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.7929967 = fieldWeight in 5893, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5893)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Papers pro and contra having been presented at the Annual Residential Seminar of the Cataloguing and Indexing Group, Winchester, July 1992, by Stuart James (as proposer) and Eric Hunter (as opposer)

0.06828035 = product of:
  0.1365607 = sum of:
    0.022232218 = weight(_text_:und in 818) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022232218 = score(doc=818,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12830718 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.17327337 = fieldWeight in 818, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=818)
    0.11432848 = weight(_text_:having in 818) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11432848 = score(doc=818,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.3304153 = fieldWeight in 818, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=818)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

The social dynamics of alternative facts: why what you believe depends on who you know. Why should we care about having true beliefs? And why do demonstrably false beliefs persist and spread despite bad, even fatal, consequences for the people who hold them? Philosophers of science Cailin OConnor and James Weatherall argue that social factors, rather than individual psychology, are whats essential to understanding the spread and persistence of false beliefs. It might seem that theres an obvious reason that true beliefs matter: false beliefs will hurt you. But if thats right, then why is it (apparently) irrelevant to many people whether they believe true things or not? The Misinformation Age, written for a political era riven by fake news, alternative facts, and disputes over the validity of everything from climate change to the size of inauguration crowds, shows convincingly that what you believe depends on who you know. If social forces explain the persistence of false belief, we must understand how those forces work in order to fight misinformation effectively.

BK

05.20 Kommunikation und Gesellschaft

Classification

05.20 Kommunikation und Gesellschaft

0.06502452 = product of:
  0.13004903 = sum of:
    0.015720552 = weight(_text_:und in 3794) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015720552 = score(doc=3794,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12830718 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = 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)
    0.11432848 = weight(_text_:having in 3794) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11432848 = score(doc=3794,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.3304153 = fieldWeight in 3794, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, 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.

0.06467395 = product of:
  0.2586958 = sum of:
    0.2586958 = weight(_text_:having in 5107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2586958 = score(doc=5107,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.7476445 = fieldWeight in 5107, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5107)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Describes how journalists can become empowered by having access to online sources. However, there is a low rate of take-up, partly bacause of ignorance and partly because of cost, which is prohibitive to freelancers. Even where journalists do have access to online databases they seldom have the necessary searching skills. Highlights the need for training, and the desirability of having a professional online researcher on the team as backup

0.06467395 = product of:
  0.2586958 = sum of:
    0.2586958 = weight(_text_:having in 1934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2586958 = score(doc=1934,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.7476445 = fieldWeight in 1934, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1934)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Although databases having highly structured records, with numerous searchable and displayable fields, including detailed subject indexing, are substantially more expensive to produce than databases having unstructured text, the increased cost is more than justified by the improved ease by which users can find information. Concludes that the increased costs can be recouped by the higher prices that the market will bear for these improved products

0.06467395 = product of:
  0.2586958 = sum of:
    0.2586958 = weight(_text_:having in 6501) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2586958 = score(doc=6501,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.7476445 = fieldWeight in 6501, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6501)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Examines the issue of outsourcing to obtain the shelf ready book from the aspect of public services and the viewpoint of a library administrator. Questions the necessity of having totally in house cataloguing. Highlights the advantages of having outside cataloguing and supplementary services. Outsourcing should not replace cataloguing departments but be dependent on circumstances. The main reasons for its implementation should be improved services rather than financial savings

0.06467395 = product of:
  0.2586958 = sum of:
    0.2586958 = weight(_text_:having in 3492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2586958 = score(doc=3492,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.7476445 = fieldWeight in 3492, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3492)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Discusses the problems associated with the management of knowledge and electronic information and the provision of access within organizations. Emphasizes the fact that having information does not equate with having knowledge and that locating information is only worthwhile if it can be interpreted and used to benefit the organization. Offers some solutions in the form of scanning technology and tools to codify language

0.062091902 = product of:
  0.124183804 = sum of:
    0.011004386 = weight(_text_:und in 1127) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011004386 = score(doc=1127,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12830718 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.085765935 = fieldWeight in 1127, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1127)
    0.113179415 = weight(_text_:having in 1127) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.113179415 = score(doc=1127,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.32709447 = fieldWeight in 1127, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1127)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Chapter 5 empirically tackles the first of the two research questions formulated above, namely the question of global collection statistics. More precisely, it studies possibilities of radically simplified results merging. The simplification comes from the attempt - without having knowledge of the complete collection - to equip all peers with the same global statistics, making document scores comparable across peers. Chapter 5 empirically tackles the first of the two research questions formulated above, namely the question of global collection statistics. More precisely, it studies possibilities of radically simplified results merging. The simplification comes from the attempt - without having knowledge of the complete collection - to equip all peers with the same global statistics, making document scores comparable across peers. What is examined, is the question of how we can obtain such global statistics and to what extent their use will lead to a drop in retrieval effectiveness. In chapter 6, the second research question is tackled, namely that of making forwarding decisions for queries, based on profiles of other peers. After a review of related work in that area, the chapter first defines the approaches that will be compared against each other. Then, a novel evaluation framework is introduced, including a new measure for comparing results of a distributed search engine against those of a centralised one. Finally, the actual evaluation is performed using the new framework.

Imprint

Leipzig : Universität / Fakultät für Mathematik und Informatik Institut für Informatik

0.05716424 = product of:
  0.22865696 = sum of:
    0.22865696 = weight(_text_:having in 6753) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.22865696 = score(doc=6753,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.6608306 = fieldWeight in 6753, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=6753)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

SuperJANET, a document delivery project, is a now high speed version of JANET, the electronic network that links all UK universities, as well as having an increasing number of gateways into other networks all over the world. Describes pilot applications, how it will operate and long-term implications for publishers and libraries

0.056589708 = product of:
  0.22635883 = sum of:
    0.22635883 = weight(_text_:having in 6730) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.22635883 = score(doc=6730,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.65418893 = fieldWeight in 6730, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6730)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Reports the results of a recent study by Coopers and Lybrand Consulting (CLC). Revealed that the Internet and WWW are having a negative effect on television viewing while having a positive effect on the sale of print media. 3 groups of users were defined: communicators, information seekers, and browsers. Adds that another survey by FIND/SVP identified 4 groups of users: recreational consumers, occupational consumers, corporate users, and academic users. Spotlights several interesting sites, such as the Census Bureau and Economic Research Service, which are research-based. Mentions Toiletology 101, on WC maintenance and repair, and several online versions of print publications such as National Geographic, The Nation, Motor Trend Online, and The Washington Post

0.056589708 = product of:
  0.22635883 = sum of:
    0.22635883 = weight(_text_:having in 1452) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.22635883 = score(doc=1452,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.65418893 = fieldWeight in 1452, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1452)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Examines the assumption that people want to be presented with as many different media as are possible in a given application. Reports on an exploratory study designed to assess the media preferences og the 'person on the street' when presented with the choice of 7 different media combinations to find out some unknown thing in a public space. Findings suggests that people do not always prefer to access as many different media as are available. There was a bias toward having some media combination that includes graphics, but there was also some bias against having information presented using sound in a public space

0.056589708 = product of:
  0.22635883 = sum of:
    0.22635883 = weight(_text_:having in 1069) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.22635883 = score(doc=1069,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.65418893 = fieldWeight in 1069, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1069)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

After studying the relations between two words(nouns) that constitute a compound term, the relation between corresponding concepts discussed. The impossibility of having a conjunction between two concepts that have no common feature causes inconvenience in the application of concept theory to information retrieval problems. Another kind of conjunctions, different from that by co-occurrence, is proposed and characteristics of this conjunction is studied. It revealed that one of new ones has the same character with colon combination in UDC. The possibility of having three kinds of conjunction including Wsterian concept conjunction is presented. It is also discussed that subdivisions can be replaced by new conjunctions

0.054624274 = product of:
  0.10924855 = sum of:
    0.017785773 = weight(_text_:und in 2277) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017785773 = score(doc=2277,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12830718 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.1386187 = fieldWeight in 2277, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2277)
    0.091462776 = weight(_text_:having in 2277) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.091462776 = score(doc=2277,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.26433223 = fieldWeight in 2277, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2277)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Although the scientific study of the mind has developed rapidly, it has devoted little attention to human cognition understood as everyday lived experience. "The Embodied Mind" discusses the spontaneous and reflective dimensions of human experience. The authors argue that it is only by having a sense of common ground, between mind in science and mind in experience that our understanding of cognition can be more complete. To create this common ground they develop a dialogue between cognitive science and Buddhist meditative psychology and situate this dialogue in relation to other traditions, such as phenomenology and psychoanalysis. The dialogue proceeds in five parts. The first introduces the two partners and explains how the dialogue will develop. The second presents the computational model of mind that gave rise to cognitive science in its classical form. The authors show how this model implies that the self is fundamentally fragmented and introduce the complementary Buddhist concept of a nonunified, decentralized self. The third shows how cognitive science and Buddhist psychology provide the resources for understanding how the phenomena usually attributed to a self could arise without an actual self. The fourth presents the authors' own view of cognition as embodied action and discusses the relevance of this view for cognitive science and evolutionary theory. The fifth considers the philosophical and experiential implications of the view that cognition has no foundation or ground beyond its history of embodiment and explores these implications in relation to contemporary Western critiques of objectivism and the nonfoundationalist tradition of Buddhist philosophy.

BK

77.02 / Philosophie und Theorie der Psychologie

Classification

77.02 / Philosophie und Theorie der Psychologie

0.05312582 = product of:
  0.10625164 = sum of:
    0.0490874 = weight(_text_:und in 1665) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0490874 = score(doc=1665,freq=78.0), product of:
        0.12830718 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.3825772 = fieldWeight in 1665, product of:
          8.83176 = tf(freq=78.0), with freq of:
            78.0 = termFreq=78.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1665)
    0.05716424 = weight(_text_:having in 1665) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05716424 = score(doc=1665,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.16520765 = fieldWeight in 1665, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1665)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

1. Im täglichen Leben oder im Beruf steht man oftmals vor der Aufgabe, nach Wissen zu suchen, das man in einem Buch gefunden hat oder das man darin vermutet. Dann ist es für den Suchenden lästig oder sogar unzumutbar, wenn er bei dieser Suche auf planloses Blättern angewiesen ist, bis er fündig geworden ist oder bis er schließlich zu dem Schluss gelangt, dass das Gesuchte im Buch wohl nicht enthalten ist, dies vielleicht nur irrtümlich, weil er wegen Zeitmangels vorzeitig aufgeben musste. 2. Jedes Buch, in welchem wiederverwertbares Wissen niedergelegt ist und welches nicht ausschließlich der Unterhaltung dient, sollte deswegen ein Register haben. Inhaltsverzeichnisse allein können wegen ihres allzu allgemeinen Charakters keinen ausreichend gut gezielten Zugang zum Wissen des Buches vermitteln. Als Suchender würde man allzu viel Zeit brauchen, um das momentan Interessierende darin aufzufinden. 3. Buchregister werden schon seit Jahrhunderten in unterschiedlichen Varianten angefertigt, in Abhängigkeit von der Eigenart der betreffenden Bücher, von der Verfügbarkeit von Platz und Zeit, und damit auch in Abhängigkeit von dem für das Register verfügbare Geld, abhängig aber auch von Erfahrung und Sachkundigkeit der Indexer und von den verfügbaren technischen Hilfsmitteln. 4. Ein gutes Register macht das im Buch enthaltene Wissen leicht und lückenlos wiederauffindbar und wiederverwertbar. So erlangt ein Buch erst dann seinen vollen Wert, wenn es für das gezielte (Wieder-) Auffinden von darin enthaltenem Wissen in der Weise inhaltlich erschlossen ist, dass man einen gesicherten Zugriff auf das Gesuchte hat. Dies gilt besonders für Lehr- und Anleitungsbücher. Dies ist eine Erfahrung, die schon fast so alt ist wie der Buchdruck selbst (Wellisch 1986, 1994A). 5. Mehr Bücher als jemals zuvor werden heutzutage produziert, aller Konkurrenz durch die elektronischen Medien zum Trotz. An der Notwendigkeit, das Wissen in diesen Büchern zu nutzen, hat sich nichts geändert und auch nichts an der Notwendigkeit, den Inhalt dieser Bücher leicht wiederauffindbar zu machen. Man möchte möglichst vollständig zu denjenigen Stellen im Buch hingeleitet werden, wo der Gegenstand des momentanen Interesses abgehandelt ist, und man möchte hierbei möglichst wenigem Ballast an Hinweisen auf thematisch nichteinschlägige Passagen ausgesetzt sein, denn dem Menschen steht immer nur ein sehr beschränktes Maß an Zeit und Aufmerksamkeit zum Suchen zur Verfügung. Dies sind kostbare Ressourcen, mit denen sorgsam umgegangen werden muss. Es gilt das 4. Gesetz der Bibliothekswissenschaft (Ranganathan 1967): "Save the time of the reader".
6. In diesem Buch wird in den Kapiteln 2 bis 5 ein Grundkursus zur Theorie der Inhaltserschließung angeboten, wobei die Möglichkeiten und Grenzen von natursprachiger und indexsprachiger Ausdrucksweise geklärt werden, sowie auch der Unterschied zwischen Ausdruck und Begriff, zwischen den Recherchetypen von Erinnerung und Entdeckung, zwischen den Indexierungstypen von Zuteilung und Extraktion und auch der Unterschied zwischen Register und Konkordanz. Auf einer solchen Grundlage kann der Indexer besser den Nutzen der einzelnen Indexierungswerkzeuge abschätzen, sowie auch die nachteiligen Folgen, welche durch den Verzicht auf das eine oder das andere dieser Werkzeuge zwangsläufig eintreten. In der Literatur ist zwar der Standpunkt anzutreffen, dass "allzu viel Theorie" zu vermeiden sei, weil sie doch so "grau" sei. Aber wir schließen uns lieber dem Standpunkt des Physikers Ludwig Boltzmann an: "Nichts ist praktischer als Theorie", wenn eine solche Theorie das Beobachtbare erklären und das Zukünftige voraussagen kann. 7. Im Kapitel 7 werden die Bestandteile des Schlagwort-Registers in Gestalt von Schlagwort und Fundstelle, Untereintrag und Verweisung abgehandelt und das Zusammenfügen dieser Komponenten zum Register der herkömmlichen indikativen Art. Dieser Registertyp ist gekennzeichnet durch seine Beschränkungen bezüglich der Inanspruchnahme von Platz für den Druck und durch seine Beschränkungen bezüglich des Aufwandes an Zeit und Geld zu seiner Erstellung. Es werden die hiermit zwangläufig verbundenen Mängel dargelegt. 8. Im Kapitel 8 wird die Überwindung dieser Mängel durch die Einführung von reichlichen und ausführlichen Untereinträgen gezeigt. Das Register nimmt hierdurch einen ausgesprochen informativen Charakter an. Zugleich werden auf diesem Weg auch Wesen und Nutzen eines systematischen Registers dargelegt, welches zusätzlich zum herkömmlichen alphabetischen Register vorgelegt wird. 9. Die Möglichkeit zu alledem eröffnet sich dadurch, dass eine hochentwickelte Software eingesetzt wird und dass ein außergewöhnlicher Arbeitsaufwand aufseiten des Indexers nicht gescheut wird, verbunden mit entsprechend hohen Kosten. Dieser Aufwand ist erforderlich für die Formulierung von zahlreichen und ausführlichen Untereinträgen, zum Aufbau eines systematischen, thesaurusgestützten Schlagwort-Vokabulars und für eine besonders sorgfältige Indexierung. 10. Dieses Modell eines kompletten informativen Registers ist als eine Art Werkzeugkasten zu verstehen, aus welchem man diejenigen gedanklichen und technischen Werkzeuge auswählen und miteinander kombinieren kann, welche der jeweils herrschenden Bedarfslage am besten angemessen sind. Man wird von diesen Werkzeugen besonders dann ausgiebig Gebrauch machen, wenn hohe Anforderungen an die Treffsicherheit und Leichtigkeit der Recherche gestellt werden, Anforderungen, welche mit einem Register der herkömmlichen indikativen Art nicht erfüllbar sind. Der hohe Aufwand für ein gutes Register ist natürlich nur dann gerechtfertigt, wenn aufseiten der Leser auch wirklich Bedarf zum Nachschlagen besteht. Man wird kein Register für ein Buch anlegen, welches nur zur Unterhaltung und Erbauung gelesen und dann für alle Zeiten beiseite gelegt wird.

Footnote

Rez. in: Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis 58(2007) H.3, S.186 (J. Bertram): "Bei aller Kritik: Das Buch gemahnt eindrücklich daran, dass ein gutes Register sowohl den Anforderungen einer Entdeckungsrecherche als auch denen einer Erinnerungsrecherche dienlich sein sollte, um es mit Fugmanns Worten auszudrücken. Heißt: Es soll nicht nur denen zugute kommen, die das Buch gelesen haben, sondern eben gerade auch denjenigen, die es nicht gelesen haben. Nicht nur erinnerte Wortlaute sollen mit ihm wieder auffindbar sein, vielmehr soll das Register auch schnelle Antworten auf die Frage ermöglichen, ob ein Buch zum interessierenden Thema Ergiebiges enthält. Und dass für das zweite Anliegen ein Aufwand zu betreiben ist, der über ein reines Stichwortregister hinausgeht, wird von Fugmann anschaulich und überzeugend dargestellt. Auch seinem Wunsch, dass bei der Rezension vor Büchern Vorhandensein und Qualität des Registers (stärkere) Berücksichtigung finden mögen, ist uneingeschränkt zuzustimmen. Dass das vor ihm produzierte Register des Guten zu viel tut, steht auf einem anderen Blatt."
Weitere Rez. in: Knowledge organization 34(2007) no.1, S.60-61 (I. Dahlberg): "... In conclusion, I would like to congratulate Robert Fugmann for having written this book in such a short time and - may I disclose it too? - just before his 80th birthday. And I know it is his desire to show that by improving the science of book indexing in the way demonstrated in this book, the readers will be offered an instrument for making book indexing and index reading a joy for the index readers and an adventure in an enticing world thus entered into via an intelligent presentation of knowledge!"

0.052019607 = product of:
  0.104039215 = sum of:
    0.01257644 = weight(_text_:und in 3106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01257644 = score(doc=3106,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12830718 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.098018214 = fieldWeight in 3106, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3106)
    0.091462776 = weight(_text_:having in 3106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.091462776 = score(doc=3106,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.26433223 = fieldWeight in 3106, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3106)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Zur Erreichung einer für den Besucher optimal ausgerichteten Website sind wesentliche Aufgaben bereits in der Vorbereitungsphase zu erarbeiten, unter anderem Zielgruppenermittlung, Bedürfnisfeststellung sowie Strukturierung des Angebots. Eine gute oder auch weniger gelungene Umsetzung dieser Kriterien kann an Beispielen aus der Praxis am Besten veranschaulicht werden. Um eine ungefähre Vergleichbarkeit der Angebote zu erhalten, sind im Folgenden nur die Seiten von Öffentlichen Bibliotheken gleicher Größenklasse nach Bix verwendet worden, und zwar der Klasse 4 (15 000 bis 30 000 Einwohner). Hier ist die Notwendigkeit einer allgemeinen Verbesserung des virtuellen Angebots am meisten gegeben.

Content

Mit einer Übersicht zu Usability-Kriterien: Ten Usability Heuristics I. Visibility ofsystem status The system should always keep users informed about what is going on, through appropriate feedback within reasonable time. II. Match between system and the real world The system should speak the users' language, with words, phrases and concepts familiar to the user, rather than system-oriented terms. Follow real-world conventions, making information appear in a natural and logical order. III. User control and freedom Users often choose system functions by mistake and will need a clearly marked »emergency extra to leave the unwanted state without having to go through an extended dialogue. Support undo and redo. IV. Consistency and standards Users should not have to wonder whether different words, situations, or actions mean the same thing. Follow platform conventions. V. Error prevention Even better than good error messages is a careful design which prevents a problem from occurring in the first place. VI. Recognition rather than recall Make objects, actions, and options visible. The user should not have to remember information from one Part of the dialogue to another. Instructions for use of the system should be visible or easily retrievable whenever appropriate. VII. Flexibility and efficiency of use Accelerators - unseen by the novice user- may often speed up the interaction for the expert user such that the system can cater to both inexperienced and experienced users. Allow users to tailor frequent actions. VIII. Aesthetic and minimalist design Dialogues should not contain information which is irrelevant or rarely needed. Every extra unit of information in a dialogue competes with the relevant units of information and diminishes their relative visibility. IX. Help users recognize, diagnose, and recover from errors Error messages should be expressed in plain language (no codes), precisely indicate the problem, and constructively suggest a solution. X. Help and documentation Even though it is better if the system can be used without documentation, it may be necessary to provide help and documentation. Any such information should be easy to search, focused an the user's task, list concrete steps to be carried out, and not be too large.

0.049545042 = product of:
  0.099090084 = sum of:
    0.019060155 = weight(_text_:und in 3862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019060155 = score(doc=3862,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.12830718 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.14855097 = fieldWeight in 3862, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3862)
    0.08002993 = weight(_text_:having in 3862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08002993 = score(doc=3862,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.2312907 = fieldWeight in 3862, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3862)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Human beings are information omnivores: we are constantly collecting, labeling, and organizing data. But today, the shift from the physical to the digital is mixing, burning, and ripping our lives apart. In the past, everything had its one place--the physical world demanded it--but now everything has its places: multiple categories, multiple shelves. Simply put, everything is suddenly miscellaneous. In Everything Is Miscellaneous, David Weinberger charts the new principles of digital order that are remaking business, education, politics, science, and culture. In his rollicking tour of the rise of the miscellaneous, he examines why the Dewey decimal system is stretched to the breaking point, how Rand McNally decides what information not to include in a physical map (and why Google Earth is winning that battle), how Staples stores emulate online shopping to increase sales, why your children's teachers will stop having them memorize facts, and how the shift to digital music stands as the model for the future in virtually every industry. Finally, he shows how by "going miscellaneous," anyone can reap rewards from the deluge of information in modern work and life. From A to Z, Everything Is Miscellaneous will completely reshape the way you think--and what you know--about the world.

Footnote

Weitere Rez. in: BuB 59(2007) H.10, S.750-751 (J. Plieninger: Vermischtes und noch mehr ...): "Dass dieses Buch den Bibliothekaren gewidmet ist, stimmt tröstlich. Denn auf den Punkt gebracht, bedeutet sein Inhalt für unseren Berufsstand: Es kommt nicht mehr auf Euch an! Die Kernthese, die der Autor, ein bekannter Publizist zum Internet und Mitglied einer Harvard-Institution, in diesem Essay überaus anregend und mit vielen Beispielen gespickt ausführt, lautet: Dem Informationsüberfluss durch elektronische Dokumente kann nur noch durch noch mehr Information begegnet werden. ..." Weitere Rez. in JASIST 60(2009) no.6, S.1299-1300 (G Thornton). Vgl. für Rezensionen auch: http://www.everythingismiscellaneous.com/reviews/.