Search (67 results, page 1 of 4)

  • × language_ss:"e"
  • × theme_ss:"Metadaten"
  • × type_ss:"el"
  1. Howarth, L.C.: Metadata schemes for subject gateways (2003) 0.00 
    0.002125876 = product of:
  0.06377628 = sum of:
    0.06377628 = weight(_text_:deutsche in 1747) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06377628 = score(doc=1747,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10186133 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.7224083 = idf(docFreq=1068, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.6261088 = fieldWeight in 1747, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.7224083 = idf(docFreq=1068, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1747)
  0.033333335 = coord(1/30)
    Content
    Deutsche Fassung unter: http://www.ifla.org/IV/ifla69/papers/053g trans-Howarth.pdf
  2. Buckland, M.; Chen, A.; Chen, H.M.; Kim, Y.; Lam, B.; Larson, R.; Norgard, B.; Purat, J.; Gey, F.: Mapping entry vocabulary to unfamiliar metadata vocabularies (1999) 0.00 
    0.001573828 = product of:
  0.01573828 = sum of:
    0.0070240153 = weight(_text_:und in 1238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0070240153 = score(doc=1238,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.14692576 = fieldWeight in 1238, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1238)
    0.0070240153 = weight(_text_:und in 1238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0070240153 = score(doc=1238,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.14692576 = fieldWeight in 1238, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1238)
    0.0016902501 = weight(_text_:s in 1238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0016902501 = score(doc=1238,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 1238, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1238)
  0.1 = coord(3/30)
    Footnote
    Vgl.: http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january99/buckland/01buckland.html und http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/research/metadata/oasis.html.
    Source
    D-Lib magazine. 5(1999) no.1, xx S
  3. Tonkin, E.; Baptista, A.A.; Hooland, S. van; Resmini, A.; Mendéz, E.; Neville, L.: Kinds of Tags : a collaborative research study on tag usage and structure (2007) 0.00 
    0.001512184 = product of:
  0.01512184 = sum of:
    0.004365201 = weight(_text_:in in 531) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004365201 = score(doc=531,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.14877784 = fieldWeight in 531, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=531)
    0.008784681 = product of:
      0.026354041 = sum of:
        0.026354041 = weight(_text_:l in 531) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026354041 = score(doc=531,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.0857324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.30739886 = fieldWeight in 531, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=531)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.0019719584 = weight(_text_:s in 531) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0019719584 = score(doc=531,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.08408674 = fieldWeight in 531, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=531)
  0.1 = coord(3/30)
    Abstract
    KoT (Kinds of Tags) is an ongoing joint collaborative research effort with many participants worldwide, including the University of Minho, UKOLN, the University of Bologna, the Université Libre de Bruxelles and La Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. It is focused on the analysis of tags that are in common use in the practice of social tagging, with the aim of discovering how easily tags can be 'normalised' for interoperability with standard metadata environments such as the DC Metadata Terms.
  4. Baker, T.: ¬A grammar of Dublin Core (2000) 0.00 
    0.0011638247 = product of:
  0.0116382465 = sum of:
    0.0046665967 = weight(_text_:in in 1236) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0046665967 = score(doc=1236,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.15905021 = fieldWeight in 1236, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1236)
    0.0011268335 = weight(_text_:s in 1236) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0011268335 = score(doc=1236,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.048049565 = fieldWeight in 1236, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1236)
    0.005844816 = product of:
      0.011689632 = sum of:
        0.011689632 = weight(_text_:22 in 1236) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011689632 = score(doc=1236,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07553371 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1236, 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=1236)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.1 = coord(3/30)
    Abstract
    Dublin Core is often presented as a modern form of catalog card -- a set of elements (and now qualifiers) that describe resources in a complete package. Sometimes it is proposed as an exchange format for sharing records among multiple collections. The founding principle that "every element is optional and repeatable" reinforces the notion that a Dublin Core description is to be taken as a whole. This paper, in contrast, is based on a much different premise: Dublin Core is a language. More precisely, it is a small language for making a particular class of statements about resources. Like natural languages, it has a vocabulary of word-like terms, the two classes of which -- elements and qualifiers -- function within statements like nouns and adjectives; and it has a syntax for arranging elements and qualifiers into statements according to a simple pattern. Whenever tourists order a meal or ask directions in an unfamiliar language, considerate native speakers will spontaneously limit themselves to basic words and simple sentence patterns along the lines of "I am so-and-so" or "This is such-and-such". Linguists call this pidginization. In such situations, a small phrase book or translated menu can be most helpful. By analogy, today's Web has been called an Internet Commons where users and information providers from a wide range of scientific, commercial, and social domains present their information in a variety of incompatible data models and description languages. In this context, Dublin Core presents itself as a metadata pidgin for digital tourists who must find their way in this linguistically diverse landscape. Its vocabulary is small enough to learn quickly, and its basic pattern is easily grasped. It is well-suited to serve as an auxiliary language for digital libraries. This grammar starts by defining terms. It then follows a 200-year-old tradition of English grammar teaching by focusing on the structure of single statements. It concludes by looking at the growing dictionary of Dublin Core vocabulary terms -- its registry, and at how statements can be used to build the metadata equivalent of paragraphs and compositions -- the application profile.
    Date
    26.12.2011 14:01:22
    Source
    D-Lib magazine. 6(2000) no.10, xx S
  5. Understanding metadata (2004) 0.00 
    9.2955335E-4 = product of:
  0.0139433 = sum of:
    0.002253667 = weight(_text_:s in 2686) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.002253667 = score(doc=2686,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.09609913 = fieldWeight in 2686, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2686)
    0.011689632 = product of:
      0.023379264 = sum of:
        0.023379264 = weight(_text_:22 in 2686) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023379264 = score(doc=2686,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07553371 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2686, 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=2686)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
    Date
    10. 9.2004 10:22:40
    Pages
    20 S
  6. Roy, W.; Gray, C.: Preparing existing metadata for repository batch import : a recipe for a fickle food (2018) 0.00 
    8.157342E-4 = product of:
  0.012236012 = sum of:
    0.004929992 = weight(_text_:in in 4550) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004929992 = score(doc=4550,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.16802745 = fieldWeight in 4550, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4550)
    0.0073060202 = product of:
      0.0146120405 = sum of:
        0.0146120405 = weight(_text_:22 in 4550) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0146120405 = score(doc=4550,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07553371 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4550, 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=4550)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
    Abstract
    In 2016, the University of Waterloo began offering a mediated copyright review and deposit service to support the growth of our institutional repository UWSpace. This resulted in the need to batch import large lists of published works into the institutional repository quickly and accurately. A range of methods have been proposed for harvesting publications metadata en masse, but many technological solutions can easily become detached from a workflow that is both reproducible for support staff and applicable to a range of situations. Many repositories offer the capacity for batch upload via CSV, so our method provides a template Python script that leverages the Habanero library for populating CSV files with existing metadata retrieved from the CrossRef API. In our case, we have combined this with useful metadata contained in a TSV file downloaded from Web of Science in order to enrich our metadata as well. The appeal of this 'low-maintenance' method is that it provides more robust options for gathering metadata semi-automatically, and only requires the user's ability to access Web of Science and the Python program, while still remaining flexible enough for local customizations.
    Date
    10.11.2018 16:27:22
  7. Weibel, S.: ¬A proposed convention for embedding metadata in HTML <June 2, 1996> (1996) 0.00 
    7.708376E-4 = product of:
  0.0115625635 = sum of:
    0.00705523 = weight(_text_:in in 5971) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00705523 = score(doc=5971,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.24046129 = fieldWeight in 5971, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5971)
    0.004507334 = weight(_text_:s in 5971) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004507334 = score(doc=5971,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.19219826 = fieldWeight in 5971, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5971)
  0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
  8. Suranofsky, M.; McColl, L.: a Google sheets add-on that uses the WorldCat search API : MatchMarc (2019) 0.00 
    6.783625E-4 = product of:
  0.010175437 = sum of:
    0.0026457112 = weight(_text_:in in 5442) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0026457112 = score(doc=5442,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.09017298 = fieldWeight in 5442, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5442)
    0.007529726 = product of:
      0.022589177 = sum of:
        0.022589177 = weight(_text_:l in 5442) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022589177 = score(doc=5442,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.0857324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.26348472 = fieldWeight in 5442, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5442)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
    Abstract
    Lehigh University Libraries has developed a new tool for querying WorldCat using the WorldCat Search API. The tool is a Google Sheet Add-on and is available now via the Google Sheets Add-ons menu under the name "MatchMarc." The add-on is easily customizable, with no knowledge of coding needed. The tool will return a single "best" OCLC record number, and its bibliographic information for a given ISBN or LCCN, allowing the user to set up and define "best." Because all of the information, the input, the criteria, and the results exist in the Google Sheets environment, efficient workflows can be developed from this flexible starting point. This article will discuss the development of the add-on, how it works, and future plans for development.
  9. Dekkers, M.; Weibel, S.: Dublin Core Metadata Initiative Progress Report and Workplan for 2002 (2002) 0.00 
    6.4605067E-4 = product of:
  0.00969076 = sum of:
    0.006901989 = weight(_text_:in in 1204) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006901989 = score(doc=1204,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.23523843 = fieldWeight in 1204, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1204)
    0.0027887707 = weight(_text_:s in 1204) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0027887707 = score(doc=1204,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.118916616 = fieldWeight in 1204, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1204)
  0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
    Abstract
    The Dublin Core Metadata Initiative (DCMI) progressed on many fronts in 2001, including launching important organizational changes, achievement of major objectives identified in the previous year, completion of ANSI standardization, and increased community participation and uptake of the standard. The annual workshop, held in Asia for the first time this past October, was broadened in scope to include a tutorial track and conference. This report summarizes the accomplishments and changes that have taken place in the Initiative during the past year and outlines the workplan for the coming year.
    Source
    D-Lib magazine. 8(2002) no.2, x S
  10. Dekkers, M.; Weibel, S.L.: State of the Dublin Core Metadata Initiative April 2003 (2003) 0.00 
    5.9159653E-4 = product of:
  0.008873948 = sum of:
    0.006901989 = weight(_text_:in in 2795) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006901989 = score(doc=2795,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.23523843 = fieldWeight in 2795, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2795)
    0.0019719584 = weight(_text_:s in 2795) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0019719584 = score(doc=2795,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.08408674 = fieldWeight in 2795, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2795)
  0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
    Abstract
    The Dublin Core Metadata Initiative continues to grow in participation and recognition as the predominant resource discovery metadata standard on the Internet. With its approval as ISO 15836, DC is firmly established as a foundation block of modular, interoperable metadata for distributed resources. This report summarizes developments in DCMI over the past year, including the annual conference, progress of working groups, new developments in encoding methods, and advances in documentation and dissemination. New developments in broadening the community to commercial users of metadata are discussed, and plans for an international network of national affiliates are described.
    Source
    D-Lib magazine. 9(2003) no.4, x S
  11. Ruhl, M.: Do we need metadata? : an on-line survey in German archives (2012) 0.00 
    5.914012E-4 = product of:
  0.008871017 = sum of:
    0.0064806426 = weight(_text_:in in 471) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0064806426 = score(doc=471,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.22087781 = fieldWeight in 471, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=471)
    0.002390375 = weight(_text_:s in 471) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.002390375 = score(doc=471,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.101928525 = fieldWeight in 471, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=471)
  0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
    Abstract
    The paper summarizes the results of an on-line survey which was executed 2010 in german archives of all branches. The survey focused on metadata and used metadata standards for the annotation of audiovisual media like pictures, audio and video files (analog and digital). The findings motivate the question whether archives are able to collaborate in projects like europeana if they do not use accepted standards for their orientation. Archives need more resources and archival staff need more training to execute more complex tasks in an digital and semantic surrounding.
    Pages
    S.30-36
    Source
    Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Semantic Digital Archives held in conjunction with the 16th Int. Conference on Theory and Practice of Digital Libraries (TPDL) on September 27, 2012 in Paphos, Cyprus [http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-912/proceedings.pdf]. Eds.: A. Mitschik et al
    Type
    s
  12. Broughton, V.: Automatic metadata generation : Digital resource description without human intervention (2007) 0.00 
    5.8448163E-4 = product of:
  0.017534448 = sum of:
    0.017534448 = product of:
      0.035068896 = sum of:
        0.035068896 = weight(_text_:22 in 6048) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035068896 = score(doc=6048,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07553371 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6048, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6048)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.033333335 = coord(1/30)
    Date
    22. 9.2007 15:41:14
  13. Riley, J.: Understanding metadata : what is metadata, and what is it for? (2017) 0.00 
    5.595652E-4 = product of:
  0.008393478 = sum of:
    0.004409519 = weight(_text_:in in 2005) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004409519 = score(doc=2005,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.15028831 = fieldWeight in 2005, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2005)
    0.003983958 = weight(_text_:s in 2005) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.003983958 = score(doc=2005,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.16988087 = fieldWeight in 2005, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2005)
  0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
    Footnote
    Rez. in: Cataloging and classification quarterly 55(2017) no.7/8, S.669-670 (Liz Woolcott).
    Pages
    iii, 45 S
  14. Husevag, A.-S.R.: Named entities in indexing : a case study of TV subtitles and metadata records (2016) 0.00 
    5.58707E-4 = product of:
  0.008380604 = sum of:
    0.006972062 = weight(_text_:in in 3105) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006972062 = score(doc=3105,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.2376267 = fieldWeight in 3105, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3105)
    0.0014085418 = weight(_text_:s in 3105) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0014085418 = score(doc=3105,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 3105, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3105)
  0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
    Abstract
    This paper explores the possible role of named entities in an automatic index-ing process, based on text in subtitles. This is done by analyzing entity types, name den-sity and name frequencies in subtitles and metadata records from different TV programs. The name density in metadata records is much higher than the name density in subtitles, and named entities with high frequencies in the subtitles are more likely to be mentioned in the metadata records. Personal names, geographical names and names of organizations where the most prominent entity types in both the news subtitles and news metadata, while persons, works and locations are the most prominent in culture programs.
    Pages
    S.48-58
  15. Weibel, S.: ¬The State of the Dublin Core Metadata Initiative April 1999 (1999) 0.00 
    5.423352E-4 = product of:
  0.008135028 = sum of:
    0.0053462577 = weight(_text_:in in 6066) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0053462577 = score(doc=6066,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.1822149 = fieldWeight in 6066, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6066)
    0.0027887707 = weight(_text_:s in 6066) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0027887707 = score(doc=6066,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.118916616 = fieldWeight in 6066, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6066)
  0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
    Abstract
    One hundred and one experts in resource description convened in Washington, D.C., November 2 through November 4, 1998, for the sixth Dublin Core Metadata Workshop. The registrants represented 16 countries on 4 continents, and many disciplines. As with previous workshops, many new issues were opened, and vigorous debate was a hallmark of the event. Unlike previous workshops, the focus of DC-6 was not to resolve questions in plenary meetings, but rather to identify unresolved issues and assign them to formal working groups for resolution. The result of this process was an ambitious workplan for 1999. This report summarizes that workplan, highlights the progress that has made been on the workplan, and identifies a few significant projects that exemplify this progress.
    Source
    D-Lib magazine. 5(1999) no.4, xx S
  16. McClelland, M.; McArthur, D.; Giersch, S.; Geisler, G.: Challenges for service providers when importing metadata in digital libraries (2002) 0.00 
    5.423352E-4 = product of:
  0.008135028 = sum of:
    0.0053462577 = weight(_text_:in in 565) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0053462577 = score(doc=565,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.1822149 = fieldWeight in 565, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=565)
    0.0027887707 = weight(_text_:s in 565) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0027887707 = score(doc=565,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.118916616 = fieldWeight in 565, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=565)
  0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
    Abstract
    Much of the usefulness of digital libraries lies in their ability to provide services for data from distributed repositories, and many research projects are investigating frameworks for interoperability. In this paper, we report on the experiences and lessons learned by iLumina after importing IMS metadata. iLumina utilizes the IMS metadata specification, which allows for a rich set of metadata (Dublin Core has a simpler metadata scheme that can be mapped onto a subset of the IMS metadata). Our experiences identify questions regarding intellectual property rights for metadata, protocols for enriched metadata, and tips for designing metadata services.
    Source
    D-Lib magazine. 8(2002) no.4, x S
  17. Duval, E.; Hodgins, W.; Sutton, S.; Weibel, S.L.: Metadata principles and practicalities (2002) 0.00 
    5.3020543E-4 = product of:
  0.007953081 = sum of:
    0.0063594985 = weight(_text_:in in 1208) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0063594985 = score(doc=1208,freq=26.0), product of:
        0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.2167489 = fieldWeight in 1208, product of:
          5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
            26.0 = termFreq=26.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1208)
    0.0015935833 = weight(_text_:s in 1208) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0015935833 = score(doc=1208,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.06795235 = fieldWeight in 1208, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1208)
  0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
    Abstract
    For those of us still struggling with basic concepts regarding metadata in this brave new world in which cataloging means much more than MARC, an article like this is welcome indeed. In this 30.000-foot overview of the metadata landscape, broad issues such as modularity, namespaces, extensibility, refinement, and multilingualism are discussed. In addition, "practicalities" like application profiles, syntax and semantics, metadata registries, and automated generation of metadata are explained. Although this piece is not exhaustive of high-level metadata issues, it is nonetheless a useful description of some of the most important issues surrounding metadata creation and use. The rapid changes in the means of information access occasioned by the emergence of the World Wide Web have spawned an upheaval in the means of describing and managing information resources. Metadata is a primary tool in this work, and an important link in the value chain of knowledge economies. Yet there is much confusion about how metadata should be integrated into information systems. How is it to be created or extended? Who will manage it? How can it be used and exchanged? Whence comes its authority? Can different metadata standards be used together in a given environment? These and related questions motivate this paper. The authors hope to make explicit the strong foundations of agreement shared by two prominent metadata Initiatives: the Dublin Core Metadata Initiative (DCMI) and the Institute for Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Learning Object Metadata (LOM) Working Group. This agreement emerged from a joint metadata taskforce meeting in Ottawa in August, 2001. By elucidating shared principles and practicalities of metadata, we hope to raise the level of understanding among our respective (and shared) constituents, so that all stakeholders can move forward more decisively to address their respective problems. The ideas in this paper are divided into two categories. Principles are those concepts judged to be common to all domains of metadata and which might inform the design of any metadata schema or application. Practicalities are the rules of thumb, constraints, and infrastructure issues that emerge from bringing theory into practice in the form of useful and sustainable systems.
    Source
    D-Lib magazine. 8(2002) no.4, x S
  18. Bearman, D.; Miller, E.; Rust, G.; Trant, J.; Weibel, S.: ¬A common model to support interoperable metadata : progress report on reconciling metadata requirements from the Dublin Core and INDECS/DOI communities (1999) 0.00 
    4.928343E-4 = product of:
  0.0073925145 = sum of:
    0.0054005357 = weight(_text_:in in 1249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0054005357 = score(doc=1249,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.18406484 = fieldWeight in 1249, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1249)
    0.001991979 = weight(_text_:s in 1249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.001991979 = score(doc=1249,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.08494043 = fieldWeight in 1249, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1249)
  0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
    Abstract
    The Dublin Core metadata community and the INDECS/DOI community of authors, rights holders, and publishers are seeking common ground in the expression of metadata for information resources. Recent meetings at the 6th Dublin Core Workshop in Washington DC sketched out common models for semantics (informed by the requirements articulated in the IFLA Functional Requirements for the Bibliographic Record) and conventions for knowledge representation (based on the Resource Description Framework under development by the W3C). Further development of detailed requirements is planned by both communities in the coming months with the aim of fully representing the metadata needs of each. An open "Schema Harmonization" working group has been established to identify a common framework to support interoperability among these communities. The present document represents a starting point identifying historical developments and common requirements of these perspectives on metadata and charts a path for harmonizing their respective conceptual models. It is hoped that collaboration over the coming year will result in agreed semantic and syntactic conventions that will support a high degree of interoperability among these communities, ideally expressed in a single data model and using common, standard tools.
    Source
    D-Lib magazine. 5(1999) no.1, xx S
  19. Weibel, S.L.: Border crossings : reflections on a decade of metadata consensus building (2005) 0.00 
    4.8278586E-4 = product of:
  0.0072417874 = sum of:
    0.005833246 = weight(_text_:in in 1187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005833246 = score(doc=1187,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.19881277 = fieldWeight in 1187, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1187)
    0.0014085418 = weight(_text_:s in 1187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0014085418 = score(doc=1187,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 1187, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1187)
  0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
    Abstract
    In June of this year, I performed my final official duties as part of the Dublin Core Metadata Initiative management team. It is a happy irony to affix a seal on that service in this journal, as both D-Lib Magazine and the Dublin Core celebrate their tenth anniversaries. This essay is a personal reflection on some of the achievements and lessons of that decade. The OCLC-NCSA Metadata Workshop took place in March of 1995, and as we tried to understand what it meant and who would care, D-Lib magazine came into being and offered a natural venue for sharing our work. I recall a certain skepticism when Bill Arms said "We want D-Lib to be the first place people look for the latest developments in digital library research." These were the early days in the evolution of electronic publishing, and the goal was ambitious. By any measure, a decade of high-quality electronic publishing is an auspicious accomplishment, and D-Lib (and its host, CNRI) deserve congratulations for having achieved their goal. I am grateful to have been a contributor. That first DC workshop led to further workshops, a community, a variety of standards in several countries, an ISO standard, a conference series, and an international consortium. Looking back on this evolution is both satisfying and wistful. While I am pleased that the achievements are substantial, the unmet challenges also provide a rich till in which to cultivate insights on the development of digital infrastructure.
    Source
    D-Lib magazine. 11(2005) nos.7/8, x S
  20. ¬The Dublin Core Metadata Element Set (2007) 0.00 
    4.8177355E-4 = product of:
  0.0072266026 = sum of:
    0.004409519 = weight(_text_:in in 3395) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004409519 = score(doc=3395,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.15028831 = fieldWeight in 3395, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3395)
    0.0028170836 = weight(_text_:s in 3395) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0028170836 = score(doc=3395,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.120123915 = fieldWeight in 3395, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3395)
  0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
    Abstract
    Defines fifteen metadata elements for resource description in a cross-disciplinary information environment
    Pages
    15 S

Authors

Years

Types

  • a 41
  • n 2
  • m 1
  • p 1
  • r 1
  • s 1
  • More… Less…

Themes