Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Lee, S."
  1. Lee, S.; Jacob, E.K.: ¬An integrated approach to metadata interoperability : construction of a conceptual structure between MARC and FRBR (2011) 0.01
    0.008496759 = product of:
      0.042483795 = sum of:
        0.042483795 = weight(_text_:22 in 302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042483795 = score(doc=302,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18300882 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052260913 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 302, 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=302)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  2. Loehrlein, A.; Jacob, E.K.; Lee, S.; Yang, K.: Development of heuristics in a hybrid approach to faceted classification (2006) 0.01
    0.006762158 = product of:
      0.03381079 = sum of:
        0.03381079 = weight(_text_:it in 247) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03381079 = score(doc=247,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052260913 = queryNorm
            0.22368698 = fieldWeight in 247, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=247)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    This paper describes work in progress to identify automated methods to complement and streamline the intellectual process in the generation of faceted schemes. It reports on the development of the word pair heuristic, the suffix heuristic, and the WordNet heuristic, and how the three heuristics integrate to produce an initial organization of terms from which a classificationist can more efficiently construct a faceted vocabulary.
  3. Babcock, K.; Lee, S.; Rajakumar, J.; Wagner, A.: Providing access to digital collections (2020) 0.00
    0.004830113 = product of:
      0.024150565 = sum of:
        0.024150565 = weight(_text_:it in 5855) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024150565 = score(doc=5855,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052260913 = queryNorm
            0.15977642 = fieldWeight in 5855, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5855)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    The University of Toronto Libraries is currently reviewing technology to support its Collections U of T service. Collections U of T provides search and browse access to 375 digital collections (and over 203,000 digital objects) at the University of Toronto Libraries. Digital objects typically include special collections material from the university as well as faculty digital collections, all with unique metadata requirements. The service is currently supported by IIIF-enabled Islandora, with one Fedora back end and multiple Drupal sites per parent collection (see attached image). Like many institutions making use of Islandora, UTL is now confronted with Drupal 7 end of life and has begun to investigate a migration path forward. This article will summarise the Collections U of T functional requirements and lessons learned from our current technology stack. It will go on to outline our research to date for alternate solutions. The article will review both emerging micro-service solutions, as well as out-of-the-box platforms, to provide an overview of the digital collection technology landscape in 2019. Note that our research is focused on reviewing technology solutions for providing access to digital collections, as preservation services are offered through other services at the University of Toronto Libraries.
  4. Lee, S.: Pidgin metadata framework as a mediator for metadata interoperability (2021) 0.00
    0.004830113 = product of:
      0.024150565 = sum of:
        0.024150565 = weight(_text_:it in 654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024150565 = score(doc=654,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15115225 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052260913 = queryNorm
            0.15977642 = fieldWeight in 654, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.892262 = idf(docFreq=6664, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=654)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    A pidgin metadata framework based on the concept of pidgin metadata is proposed to complement the limitations of existing approaches to metadata interoperability and to achieve more reliable metadata interoperability. The framework consists of three layers, with a hierarchical structure, and reflects the semantic and structural characteristics of various metadata. Layer 1 performs both an external function, serving as an anchor for semantic association between metadata elements, and an internal function, providing semantic categories that can encompass detailed elements. Layer 2 is an arbitrary layer composed of substantial elements from existing metadata and performs a function in which different metadata elements describing the same or similar aspects of information resources are associated with the semantic categories of Layer 1. Layer 3 implements the semantic relationships between Layer 1 and Layer 2 through the Resource Description Framework syntax. With this structure, the pidgin metadata framework can establish the criteria for semantic connection between different elements and fully reflect the complexity and heterogeneity among various metadata. Additionally, it is expected to provide a bibliographic environment that can achieve more reliable metadata interoperability than existing approaches by securing the communication between metadata.