Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

0.036013078 = product of:
  0.14405231 = sum of:
    0.14405231 = weight(_text_:assess in 4789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14405231 = score(doc=4789,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.36863554 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.8947687 = idf(docFreq=330, maxDocs=44218)
          0.062536046 = queryNorm
        0.39077166 = fieldWeight in 4789, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.8947687 = idf(docFreq=330, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4789)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The FRSAD model provides an abstract analysis of subject authority data. The article tries to assess the compatibility of this conceptual framework with formalisms and practices that have emerged from the Semantic Web community. Through applying SKOS, it becomes apparent that some interpretive decisions necessary to accommodate the rigor of formal knowledge representation languages are not supported by FRSAD itself. Difficulties in clearly aligning the thema entity with either a SKOS or OWL counterpart reveal ambiguities in the FRSAD model regarding the ontological status of thema, which seems to reflect a general uncertainty regarding the aboutness of subject authority data in the library domain.

0.016945543 = product of:
  0.06778217 = sum of:
    0.06778217 = weight(_text_:22 in 2629) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06778217 = score(doc=2629,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21899058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.062536046 = queryNorm
        0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2629, 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=2629)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas

0.0142092705 = product of:
  0.056837082 = sum of:
    0.056837082 = weight(_text_:22 in 1752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.056837082 = score(doc=1752,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.21899058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.062536046 = queryNorm
        0.2595412 = fieldWeight in 1752, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1752)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

Some examples of identifiers for concepts follow: <http://dewey.info/concept/338.4/en/edn/22/> This identifier is used to retrieve or identify the 338.4 concept in the English-language version of Edition 22. <http://dewey.info/concept/338.4/de/edn/22/> This identifier is used to retrieve or identify the 338.4 concept in the German-language version of Edition 22. <http://dewey.info/concept/333.7-333.9/> This identifier is used to retrieve or identify the 333.7-333.9 concept across all editions and language versions. <http://dewey.info/concept/333.7-333.9/about.skos> This identifier is used to retrieve a SKOS representation of the 333.7-333.9 concept (using the "resource" element). There are several open issues at this preliminary stage of development: Use cases: URIs need to represent the range of statements or questions that could be submitted to a Dewey web service. Therefore, it seems that some general questions have to be answered first: What information does an agent have when coming to a Dewey web service? What kind of questions will such an agent ask? Placement of the {locale} component: It is still an open question if the {locale} component should be placed after the {version} component instead (<http://dewey.info/concept/338.4/edn/22/en>) to emphasize that the most important instantiation of a Dewey class is its edition, not its language version. From a services point of view, however, it could make more sense to keep the current arrangement, because users are more likely to come to the service with a present understanding of the language version they are seeking without knowing the specifics of a certain edition in which they are trying to find topics. Identification of other Dewey entities: The goal is to create a locator that does not answer all, but a lot of questions that could be asked about the DDC. Which entities are missing but should be surfaced for services or user agents? How will those services or agents interact with them? Should some entities be rendered in a different way as presented? For example, (how) should the DDC Summaries be retrievable? Would it be necessary to make the DDC Manual accessible through this identifier structure?"

0.010590964 = product of:
  0.042363856 = sum of:
    0.042363856 = weight(_text_:22 in 5797) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042363856 = score(doc=5797,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21899058 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.062536046 = queryNorm
        0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5797, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5797)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Knowledge quest. 42(2013) no.2, S.22-29