Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Lagoze, C."
  • × theme_ss:"Metadaten"
  1. Arms, W.Y.; Dushay, N.; Fulker, D.; Lagoze, C.: ¬A case study in metadata harvesting : the NSDL (2003) 0.00 
    1.465579E-4 = product of:
  0.004250179 = sum of:
    0.004250179 = product of:
      0.008500358 = sum of:
        0.008500358 = weight(_text_:1 in 4780) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008500358 = score(doc=4780,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.05219918 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02124939 = queryNorm
            0.16284466 = fieldWeight in 4780, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4780)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.03448276 = coord(1/29)
    Abstract
    This paper describes the use of the Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting in the NSF's National Science Digital Library (NSDL). The protocol is used both as a method to ingest metadata into a central Metadata Repository and also as the means by which the repository exports metadata to service providers. The NSDL Search Service is used to illustrate this architecture. An early version of the Metadata Repository was an alpha test site for version 1 of the protocol and the production repository was a beta test site for version 2. This paper describes the implementation experience and early practical tests. Despite some teething troubles and the long-term difficulties of semantic compatibility, the overall conclusion is optimism that the Open Archive Initiative will be a successful part of the NSDL.
  2. Lagoze, C.: Keeping Dublin Core simple : Cross-domain discovery or resource description? (2001) 0.00 
    8.636007E-5 = product of:
  0.0025044421 = sum of:
    0.0025044421 = product of:
      0.0050088842 = sum of:
        0.0050088842 = weight(_text_:1 in 1216) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0050088842 = score(doc=1216,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.05219918 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02124939 = queryNorm
            0.09595714 = fieldWeight in 1216, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1216)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.03448276 = coord(1/29)
    Abstract
    Metadata is not monolithic. Instead, it is helpful to think of metadata as multiple views that can be projected from a single information object. Such views can form the basis of customized information services, such as search engines. Multiple views -- different types of metadata associated with a Web resource -- can facilitate a "drill-down" search paradigm, whereby people start their searches at a high level and later narrow their focus using domain-specific search categories. In Figure 1, for example, Mona Lisa may be viewed from the perspective of non-specialized searchers, with categories that are valid across domains (who painted it and when?); in the context of a museum (when and how was it acquired?); in the geo-spatial context of a walking tour using mobile devices (where is it in the gallery?); and in a legal framework (who owns the rights to its reproduction?). Multiple descriptive views imply a modular approach to metadata. Modularity is the basis of metadata architectures such as the Resource Description Framework (RDF), which permit different communities of expertise to associate and maintain multiple metadata packages for Web resources. As noted elsewhere, static association of multiple metadata packages with resources is but one way of achieving modularity. Another method is to computationally derive order-making views customized to the current needs of a client. This paper examines the evolution and scope of the Dublin Core from this perspective of metadata modularization. Dublin Core began in 1995 with a specific goal and scope -- as an easy-to-create and maintain descriptive format to facilitate cross-domain resource discovery on the Web. Over the years, this goal of "simple metadata for coarse-granularity discovery" came to mix with another goal -- that of community and domain-specific resource description and its attendant complexity. A notion of "qualified Dublin Core" evolved whereby the model for simple resource discovery -- a set of simple metadata elements in a flat, document-centric model -- would form the basis of more complex descriptions by treating the values of its elements as entities with properties ("component elements") in their own right.
    Source
    D-Lib magazine. 7(2001) no.1, xx S

Authors

Types