Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Doerr, M."
  1. Doerr, M.: Semantic problems of thesaurus mapping (2001) 0.00
    8.977237E-4 = product of:
      0.0103238225 = sum of:
        0.0063955644 = weight(_text_:und in 5902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0063955644 = score(doc=5902,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052235067 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.12243814 = fieldWeight in 5902, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5902)
        0.0039282576 = product of:
          0.007856515 = sum of:
            0.007856515 = weight(_text_:1 in 5902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.007856515 = score(doc=5902,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.023567878 = queryNorm
                0.13570388 = fieldWeight in 5902, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5902)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.08695652 = coord(2/23)
    
    Source
    Journal of digital information. 1(2001) no.8,
    Theme
    Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
  2. Boeuf, P. le; Doerr, M.: Harmonising CIDOC CRM and FRBR (2007) 0.00
    7.559094E-4 = product of:
      0.017385917 = sum of:
        0.017385917 = product of:
          0.034771834 = sum of:
            0.034771834 = weight(_text_:international in 250) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.034771834 = score(doc=250,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.023567878 = queryNorm
                0.44227937 = fieldWeight in 250, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=250)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
    
    Source
    International cataloguing and bibliographic control. 36(2007) no.4, S.90-92
  3. Doerr, M.; Gradmann, S.; Hennicke, S.; Isaac, A.; Meghini, C.; Van de Sompel, H.: ¬The Europeana Data Model (EDM) (2010) 0.00
    5.427938E-4 = product of:
      0.012484257 = sum of:
        0.012484257 = weight(_text_:im in 3967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012484257 = score(doc=3967,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.066621356 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.18739122 = fieldWeight in 3967, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3967)
      0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
    
    Content
    Vortrag im Rahmen der Session 93. Cataloguing der WORLD LIBRARY AND INFORMATION CONGRESS: 76TH IFLA GENERAL CONFERENCE AND ASSEMBLY, 10-15 August 2010, Gothenburg, Sweden - 149. Information Technology, Cataloguing, Classification and Indexing with Knowledge Management
  4. Peponakis, M.; Mastora, A.; Kapidakis, S.; Doerr, M.: Expressiveness and machine processability of Knowledge Organization Systems (KOS) : an analysis of concepts and relations (2020) 0.00
    3.149623E-4 = product of:
      0.0072441325 = sum of:
        0.0072441325 = product of:
          0.014488265 = sum of:
            0.014488265 = weight(_text_:international in 5787) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.014488265 = score(doc=5787,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.023567878 = queryNorm
                0.18428308 = fieldWeight in 5787, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5787)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
    
    Source
    International journal on digital libraries. 20(2020) no.4, S.433-452
  5. Doerr, M.; Riva, P.; Zumer, M.: FRBR entities : identity and identification (2012) 0.00
    1.3663506E-4 = product of:
      0.0031426062 = sum of:
        0.0031426062 = product of:
          0.0062852125 = sum of:
            0.0062852125 = weight(_text_:1 in 1917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0062852125 = score(doc=1917,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.023567878 = queryNorm
                0.1085631 = fieldWeight in 1917, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1917)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
    
    Abstract
    The models in the FRBR family include ways to document names or terms for all entities defined in the models, with identification as the ultimate aim, i.e., to distinguish entities by unique appellations and to use the most reliable appellations for entities in a given context. The intention in this paper is to explore the interrelationships between these different models with regards to their treatment of names, identifiers and other appellation entities. The specialisation/generalisation structure of the appellation-related entities and the relationships and properties of these entities will be discussed. The paper also tries to clarify the potential confusion of identity itself in this context - when are we talking about an entity via its name, about the name itself, about the name citation in a document and when about a name of name? In FRBR(er), titles for group 1, names for group 2 and terms for group 3 entities are merely defined as attributes of these entities. This serves the basic requirement of associating the appellation (label) with the entity, but does not allow introducing attributes of these appellations or relationships between and among them. FRAD, completed a decade later, defined as entities name, identifier, and controlled access point. Clearly making the distinction between a bibliographic entity and its name is a significant step taken in FRAD. This permits the separate treatment of relationships between the persons, families, and corporate bodies themselves and those relationships which instead operate between their names or between the controlled access points based on those names. In FRSAD, the most recent model, two entities are defined, Thema and Nomen. Again, the bibliographic entity is distinguished from the full range of its appellations. The FRBRoo model expanded on the treatment of appellations and identifiers in CRM by modeling the identifier assignment process. In FRBRoo, F12 Name was defined but identified with the existing CRM entity E41 Appellation. Current development is concentrating on integrating FRAD and FRSAD concepts into FRBRoo, and this is putting a focus on naming and appellations, causing new classes and properties to be defined, and requiring a re-evaluation of some of the decisions previously made in FRBRoo. As naming and appellations are such a significant feature of the FRBR family of conceptual models, this work is an important step in towards the consolidation of the models into a single coherent statement of the bibliographic universe.