Search (1055 results, page 53 of 53)

0.0050237724 = product of:
  0.02009509 = sum of:
    0.02009509 = product of:
      0.04019018 = sum of:
        0.04019018 = weight(_text_:22 in 1540) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04019018 = score(doc=1540,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17312855 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1540, 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=1540)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

18.11.2014 13:22:03

0.0050237724 = product of:
  0.02009509 = sum of:
    0.02009509 = product of:
      0.04019018 = sum of:
        0.04019018 = weight(_text_:22 in 2636) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04019018 = score(doc=2636,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17312855 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2636, 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=2636)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

22. 1.2016 11:51:19

0.0050237724 = product of:
  0.02009509 = sum of:
    0.02009509 = product of:
      0.04019018 = sum of:
        0.04019018 = weight(_text_:22 in 2639) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04019018 = score(doc=2639,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17312855 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2639, 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=2639)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

22. 1.2016 12:02:26

0.0047364584 = product of:
  0.018945834 = sum of:
    0.018945834 = product of:
      0.037891667 = sum of:
        0.037891667 = weight(_text_:22 in 3012) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037891667 = score(doc=3012,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17312855 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.21886435 = fieldWeight in 3012, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3012)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

22. 7.2009 11:23:22

0.0041864775 = product of:
  0.01674591 = sum of:
    0.01674591 = product of:
      0.03349182 = sum of:
        0.03349182 = weight(_text_:22 in 5562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03349182 = score(doc=5562,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17312855 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5562, 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=5562)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 21(1995) no.2, S.19-22

0.0041864775 = product of:
  0.01674591 = sum of:
    0.01674591 = product of:
      0.03349182 = sum of:
        0.03349182 = weight(_text_:22 in 5582) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03349182 = score(doc=5582,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17312855 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5582, 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=5582)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Series

Cataloging and classification quarterly; vol.22, nos.3/4

0.0041864775 = product of:
  0.01674591 = sum of:
    0.01674591 = product of:
      0.03349182 = sum of:
        0.03349182 = weight(_text_:22 in 143) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03349182 = score(doc=143,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17312855 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 143, 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=143)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

7. 3.2007 16:22:24

0.0041864775 = product of:
  0.01674591 = sum of:
    0.01674591 = product of:
      0.03349182 = sum of:
        0.03349182 = weight(_text_:22 in 2756) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03349182 = score(doc=2756,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17312855 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2756, 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=2756)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

22. 3.2009 18:57:23

0.0041864775 = product of:
  0.01674591 = sum of:
    0.01674591 = product of:
      0.03349182 = sum of:
        0.03349182 = weight(_text_:22 in 4195) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03349182 = score(doc=4195,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17312855 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4195, 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=4195)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

22. 1.2011 14:16:14

0.0041864775 = product of:
  0.01674591 = sum of:
    0.01674591 = product of:
      0.03349182 = sum of:
        0.03349182 = weight(_text_:22 in 1622) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03349182 = score(doc=1622,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17312855 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1622, 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=1622)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

0.0041864775 = product of:
  0.01674591 = sum of:
    0.01674591 = product of:
      0.03349182 = sum of:
        0.03349182 = weight(_text_:22 in 2650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03349182 = score(doc=2650,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17312855 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2650, 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=2650)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

22. 1.2016 11:50:46

0.0036360407 = product of:
  0.014544163 = sum of:
    0.014544163 = weight(_text_:web in 1554) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014544163 = score(doc=1554,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.09014259 = fieldWeight in 1554, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1554)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

What Is CAIDA? Association for Internet Data Analysis, started in 1997 and is based in the San Diego Supercomputer Center. CAIDA is led by KC Claffy along with a staff of serious Net techie researchers and grad students, and they are one of the worlds leading teams of academic researchers studying how the Internet works [6] . Their mission is "to provide a neutral framework for promoting greater cooperation in developing and deploying Internet measurement, analysis, and visualization tools that will support engineering and maintaining a robust, scaleable global Internet infrastructure." In addition to the Walrus visualization tool and the skitter monitoring system which we have touched on here, CAIDA has many other interesting projects mapping the infrastructure and operations of the global Internet. Two of my particular favorite visualization projects developed at CAIDA are MAPNET and Plankton [7] . MAPNET provides a useful interactive tool for mapping ISP backbones onto real-world geography. You can select from a range of commercial and research backbones and compare their topology of links overlaid on the same map. (The major problem with MAPNET is that is based on static database of ISP backbones links, which has unfortunately become obsolete over time.) Plankton, developed by CAIDA researchers Bradley Huffaker and Jaeyeon Jung, is an interactive tool for visualizing the topology and traffic on the global hierarchy of Web caches.

0.0033491817 = product of:
  0.013396727 = sum of:
    0.013396727 = product of:
      0.026793454 = sum of:
        0.026793454 = weight(_text_:22 in 4440) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026793454 = score(doc=4440,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17312855 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 4440, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4440)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

0.0032993436 = product of:
  0.0131973745 = sum of:
    0.0131973745 = weight(_text_:search in 3198) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0131973745 = score(doc=3198,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.076802336 = fieldWeight in 3198, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=3198)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

Rez.: ZfBB 52(2005) H.1, S.52-53 (N. Lossau: "Service-Gedanke Digitale Bibliotheken gehören heute bereits zum selbstverständlichen Vokabular von Bibliothekaren und es gibt wohl kaum einen Internetauftritt von Bibliotheken, der nicht eine Digitale Bibliothek beinhaltet. Fast ebenso vielfältig wie die Vorkommen sind auch die Ausprägungen und Definitionen von Digitalen Bibliotheken, weshalb man mit einer Mischung aus Interesse und Skepsis das vorliegende Buch in die Hand nimmt. »The ultimate digital library«, ein ambitionierter Titel, vom Autor und der American Library Association, in deren Reihe die Publikation erschienen ist, wohl nicht zuletzt aus Marketinggründen wohlbedacht gewählt, suggeriert dem Leser, dass hier die vollendete, perfekte Form einer Digitalen Bibliothek beschrieben wird, die sich seit den goer Jahren mit rasantem Tempo entwickelt hat. Es dauert eine ganze Weile, bis der Leser auf die Definition von Pace stößt, die sich als roter Faden durch sein Werk zieht: »The digital library - a comprehensive definition will not be attempted here - encompasses not only collections in digital form, but digital services that continue to define the library as a place.« (S.73) Pace konzentriert sich auf den ServiceAspekt von Digitalen Bibliotheken und zielt damit auf eine Entwicklung ab, die in der Tat als zukunftsweisend für Bibliotheken und Digitale Bibliotheken zu gelten hat. Zu lange haben Bibliotheken sich schwerpunktmäßig auf die digitalen Sammlungen und ihre Produktion (durch Digitalisierung) oder Kauf und Lizenzierung konzentriert, wie Pace zu Recht an der gleichen Stelle beklagt. Die Zukunft mussfür Bibliotheken in der Entwicklung und Bereitstellung von digitalen Services liegen, die den Endnutzern einen echten Mehrwert zu bieten haben. Darin liegt sein Verständnis einer ultimativen Digitalen Bibliothek begründet, ohne dass er die Definition ausführlicher thematisiert. Pace räumt in diesem Zusammenhang auch mit einem Mythos auf, der die Digitalen Bibliotheken lediglich als »Hilfsdienste« einer traditionellen Bibliothek betrachtet. Wesentlich sympathischer und realistischer erscheint dem Leser die folgende Charakterisierung des Verhältnisses: »The digital-traditional relationship is symbiotic, not parasitic: digital tools, services, and expertise exist to enhance the services and collections of libraries, not necessarily to replace them.« (S. 73) Kooperation mit SoftwareAnbietern Der inhaltliche Leitgedanke der digitalen Services ist auch eine ideale Basis für eine weitere Botschaft von Pace, die er mit seinem Buch vermitteln möchte: Bibliothekare und Anbietervon BibliotheksSoftware müssen bei der Entwicklung dieser Services eng zusammenarbeiten. Glaubt man dem Vorwort, dann stellt das Verhältnis von »libraries and vendors« [Bibliotheken und Anbietern] die Ausgangsthematik für die Publikation dar, wie sie von der American Library Association bei Pace in Auftrag gegeben wurde. Dieserverfügt offensichtlich über den geeigneten Erfahrungshintergrund, um eine solche Beschreibung abzuliefern. Nach seinem Studiumsabschluss als M.S.L.S. begann er seine berufliche Laufbahn zunächst für mehr als drei Jahre bei der Firma für Software zur Bibliotheksautomatisierung, Innovative Interfaces,woer unteranderem als Spezialist zur Produktintegration von z.B. WebPAC,Advanced Keyword Search arbeitete. Heute ist Pace »Head of Systems« an den North Carolina State University Libraries (Raleigh, N.C.) und ständiger Kolumnist in dem Magazin Computers in Libraries.

0.0029088326 = product of:
  0.0116353305 = sum of:
    0.0116353305 = weight(_text_:web in 1795) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0116353305 = score(doc=1795,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.07211407 = fieldWeight in 1795, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1795)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

The economic opportunity divide is predicated an the hypothesis that there has, indeed, been a major shift in opportunities driven by changes in the information environment. The authors document this paradigm shift well with arguments from the political and economic right and left. This chapter might be described as an "attitudinal" chapter. The authors are concerned here with the perceptions of their respondents of their information skills and skill levels with their economic outlook and opportunities. Technological skills and economic opportunities are correlated, one finds, in the minds of all across all ages, genders, races, ethnicities, and income levels. African Americans in particular are ". . attuned to the use of technology for economic opportunity" (p. 80). The fourth divide is the democratic divide. The Internet may increase political participation, the authors posit, but only among groups predisposed to participate and perhaps among those with the skills necessary to take advantage of the electronic environment (p. 86). Certainly the Web has played an important role in disseminating and distributing political messages and in some cases in political fund raising. But by the analysis here, we must conclude that the message does not reach everyone equally. Thus, the Internet may widen the political participation gap rather than narrow it. The book has one major, perhaps fatal, flaw: its methodology and statistical application. The book draws upon a survey performed for the authors in June and July 2001 by the Kent State University's Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI) lab (pp. 7-9). CATI employed a survey protocol provided to the reader as Appendix 2. An examination of the questionnaire reveals that all questions yield either nominal or ordinal responses, including the income variable (pp. 9-10). Nevertheless, Mossberger, Tolbert, and Stansbury performed a series of multiple regression analyses (reported in a series of tables in Appendix 1) utilizing these data. Regression analysis requires interval/ratio data in order to be valid although nominal and ordinal data can be incorporated by building dichotomous dummy variables. Perhaps Mossberger, Tolbert, and Stansbury utilized dummy variables; but 1 do not find that discussed. Moreover, 1 would question a multiple regression made up completely of dichotomous dummy variables. I come away from Virtual Inequality with mixed feelings. It is useful to think of the digital divide as more than one phenomenon. The four divides that Mossberger, Tolbert, and Stansbury offeraccess, skills, economic opportunity, and democratic-are useful as a point of departure and debate. No doubt, other divides will be identified and documented. This book will lead the way. Second, without question, Mossberger, Tolbert, and Stansbury provide us with an extremely well-documented, -written, and -argued work. Third, the authors are to be commended for the multidisciplinarity of their work. Would that we could see more like it. My reservations about their methodological approach, however, hang over this review like a shroud."