Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Martin, P."
  1. Martin, P.; Vaillant, S.: ¬Le records management : Concept nouveau? Pratique ancienne? (1998) 0.04 
    0.035622425 = product of:
  0.07124485 = sum of:
    0.07124485 = sum of:
      0.009471525 = weight(_text_:a in 2430) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.009471525 = score(doc=2430,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 2430, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2430)
      0.061773323 = weight(_text_:22 in 2430) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.061773323 = score(doc=2430,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.38301262 = fieldWeight in 2430, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2430)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Records management has appeared lately in France to designate the management of organizational documents and electronic data an enterprise must retain as proof of its activities and transactions. An international standard is under discussion to address issues concerned with retention. At the same time, some information professionals are finding themselves increasingly involved with active company records, since the role of records manager requires skills found in the professions of archivists, information scientist and quality controller. Presents examples which pose the question, is records management in fact a new profession or simply a new form of a familiar job?
    Date
    1. 8.1996 22:01:00
    31.12.1998 15:32:22
    Type
    a
  2. Martin, P.: Intranet presentation technique et perspectives (1996) 0.03 
    0.028787265 = product of:
  0.05757453 = sum of:
    0.05757453 = sum of:
      0.007654148 = weight(_text_:a in 6998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.007654148 = score(doc=6998,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 6998, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6998)
      0.04992038 = weight(_text_:22 in 6998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04992038 = score(doc=6998,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 6998, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6998)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Considers how Intranets are being developed by adapting Internet technologies. Discusses the Internet technologies of data transport, file transfer, massage exchange, and information and document dissemination on the Web and explains how these may be implemented within an organization. Documentation professionals may use these techniques to improve the circulation of information within a company and increase the accumulation of knowledge
    Date
    1. 8.1996 22:01:00
    Type
    a
  3. Martin, P.; Eklund, P.: Embedding knowledge in Web documents (1999) 0.00 
    0.0023678814 = product of:
  0.0047357627 = sum of:
    0.0047357627 = product of:
      0.009471525 = sum of:
        0.009471525 = weight(_text_:a in 6266) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009471525 = score(doc=6266,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 6266, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6266)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Type
    a
  4. Martin, P.; Eklund, P.W.: Knowledge retrieval and the World Wide Web (2000) 0.00 
    0.0023678814 = product of:
  0.0047357627 = sum of:
    0.0047357627 = product of:
      0.009471525 = sum of:
        0.009471525 = weight(_text_:a in 6870) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009471525 = score(doc=6870,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 6870, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6870)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Type
    a
  5. Martin, P.: Conventions and notations for knowledge representation and retrieval (2000) 0.00 
    0.0014351527 = product of:
  0.0028703054 = sum of:
    0.0028703054 = product of:
      0.005740611 = sum of:
        0.005740611 = weight(_text_:a in 5070) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005740611 = score(doc=5070,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.10809815 = fieldWeight in 5070, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5070)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Much research has focused on the problem of knowledge accessibility, sharing and reuse. Specific languages (e.g. KIF, CG, RDF) and ontologies have been proposed. Common characteristics, conventions or ontological distinctions are beginning to emerge. Since knowledge providers (humans and software agents) must follow common conventions for the knowledge to be widely accessed and re-used, we propose lexical, structural, semantic and ontological conventions based on various knowledge representation projects and our own research. These are minimal conventions that can be followed by most and cover the most common knowledge representation cases. However, agreement and refinements are still required. We also show that a notation can be both readable and expressive by quickly presenting two new notations -- Formalized English (FE) and Frame-CG (FCG) - derived from the CG linear form [9] and Frame-Logics [4]. These notations support the above conventions, and are implemented in our Web-based knowledge representation and document indexation tool, WebKB¹ [7]
    Type
    a

Authors

Years

Languages

Themes