Seadle, M.: METS and the metadata marketplace (2002)
0.05
0.049779683 = product of:
0.09955937 = sum of:
0.068930924 = weight(_text_:digital in 1779) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.068930924 = score(doc=1779,freq=2.0), product of:
0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
0.050121464 = queryNorm
0.34865242 = fieldWeight in 1779, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1779)
0.030628446 = weight(_text_:library in 1779) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030628446 = score(doc=1779,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.050121464 = queryNorm
0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 1779, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1779)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- One purpose of the Metadata Encoding and Transmission Standard (METS) is to deal with the multiplication of metadata types in recent years, and especially metadata that deal with non-paper materials, including audiovisual sources and their digital representations. In that sense, it is a kind of meta-metadata. But is it needed? Market forces may decide.
- Source
- Library hi tech. 20(2002) no.3, S.255-257
