Search (513 results, page 3 of 26)

  • × language_ss:"e"
  • × theme_ss:"Metadaten"
  1. Ilik, V.; Storlien, J.; Olivarez, J.: Metadata makeover (2014) 0.02
    0.022636123 = product of:
      0.045272246 = sum of:
        0.045272246 = sum of:
          0.0060186423 = weight(_text_:a in 2606) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.0060186423 = score(doc=2606,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = queryNorm
              0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 2606, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2606)
          0.039253604 = weight(_text_:22 in 2606) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.039253604 = score(doc=2606,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = queryNorm
              0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2606, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2606)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Catalogers have become fluent in information technology such as web design skills, HyperText Markup Language (HTML), Cascading Stylesheets (CSS), eXensible Markup Language (XML), and programming languages. The knowledge gained from learning information technology can be used to experiment with methods of transforming one metadata schema into another using various software solutions. This paper will discuss the use of eXtensible Stylesheet Language Transformations (XSLT) for repurposing, editing, and reformatting metadata. Catalogers have the requisite skills for working with any metadata schema, and if they are excluded from metadata work, libraries are wasting a valuable human resource.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Type
    a
  2. MARC and metadata : METS, MODS, and MARCXML: current and future implications (2004) 0.02
    0.022430632 = product of:
      0.044861265 = sum of:
        0.044861265 = product of:
          0.08972253 = sum of:
            0.08972253 = weight(_text_:22 in 2840) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08972253 = score(doc=2840,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041389145 = queryNorm
                0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 2840, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2840)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1
  3. Méndez, E.; López, L.M.; Siches, A.; Bravo, A.G.: DCMF: DC & Microformats, a good marriage (2008) 0.02
    0.02198181 = product of:
      0.04396362 = sum of:
        0.04396362 = sum of:
          0.010317672 = weight(_text_:a in 2634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.010317672 = score(doc=2634,freq=16.0), product of:
              0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = queryNorm
              0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 2634, product of:
                4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                  16.0 = termFreq=16.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2634)
          0.033645947 = weight(_text_:22 in 2634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.033645947 = score(doc=2634,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2634, 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=2634)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This report introduces the Dublin Core Microformats (DCMF) project, a new way to use the DC element set within X/HTML. The DC microformats encode explicit semantic expressions in an X/HTML webpage, by using a specific list of terms for values of the attributes "rev" and "rel" for <a> and <link> elements, and "class" and "id" of other elements. Microformats can be easily processed by user agents and software, enabling a high level of interoperability. These characteristics are crucial for the growing number of social applications allowing users to participate in the Web 2.0 environment as information creators and consumers. This report reviews the origins of microformats; illustrates the coding of DC microformats using the Dublin Core Metadata Gen tool, and a Firefox extension for extraction and visualization; and discusses the benefits of creating Web services utilizing DC microformats.
    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
    Type
    a
  4. Margaritopoulos, T.; Margaritopoulos, M.; Mavridis, I.; Manitsaris, A.: ¬A conceptual framework for metadata quality assessment (2008) 0.02
    0.02198181 = product of:
      0.04396362 = sum of:
        0.04396362 = sum of:
          0.010317672 = weight(_text_:a in 2643) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.010317672 = score(doc=2643,freq=16.0), product of:
              0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = queryNorm
              0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 2643, product of:
                4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                  16.0 = termFreq=16.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2643)
          0.033645947 = weight(_text_:22 in 2643) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.033645947 = score(doc=2643,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2643, 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=2643)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Metadata quality of digital resources in a repository is an issue directly associated with the repository's efficiency and value. In this paper, the subject of metadata quality is approached by introducing a new conceptual framework that defines it in terms of its fundamental components. Additionally, a method for assessing these components by exploiting structural and semantic relations among the resources is presented. These relations can be used to generate implied logic rules, which include, impose or prohibit certain values in the fields of a metadata record. The use of such rules can serve as a tool for conducting quality control in the records, in order to diagnose deficiencies and errors.
    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
    Type
    a
  5. Caplan, P.; Guenther, R.: Metadata for Internet resources : the Dublin Core Metadata Elements Set and its mapping to USMARC (1996) 0.02
    0.021754714 = product of:
      0.043509427 = sum of:
        0.043509427 = sum of:
          0.0042558224 = weight(_text_:a in 6128) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.0042558224 = score(doc=6128,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = queryNorm
              0.089176424 = fieldWeight in 6128, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6128)
          0.039253604 = weight(_text_:22 in 6128) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.039253604 = score(doc=6128,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = queryNorm
              0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 6128, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6128)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Series
    Cataloging and classification quarterly; vol.22, nos.3/4
    Type
    a
  6. Jizba, L.; Hillmann, D.I.: Insights from Ithaca : an interview with Diane Hillmann on metadata, Dublin Core, the National Science Digital Library, and more (2004/05) 0.02
    0.021754714 = product of:
      0.043509427 = sum of:
        0.043509427 = sum of:
          0.0042558224 = weight(_text_:a in 637) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.0042558224 = score(doc=637,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = queryNorm
              0.089176424 = fieldWeight in 637, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=637)
          0.039253604 = weight(_text_:22 in 637) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.039253604 = score(doc=637,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = queryNorm
              0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 637, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=637)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    2.12.2007 19:35:22
    Type
    a
  7. Baker, T.: Dublin Core Application Profiles : current approaches (2010) 0.02
    0.021648623 = product of:
      0.043297246 = sum of:
        0.043297246 = sum of:
          0.009651299 = weight(_text_:a in 3737) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.009651299 = score(doc=3737,freq=14.0), product of:
              0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = queryNorm
              0.20223314 = fieldWeight in 3737, product of:
                3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                  14.0 = termFreq=14.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3737)
          0.033645947 = weight(_text_:22 in 3737) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.033645947 = score(doc=3737,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3737, 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=3737)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The Dublin Core Metadata Initiative currently defines a Dublin Core Application Profile as a set of specifications about the metadata design of a particular application or for a particular domain or community of users. The current approach to application profiles is summarized in the Singapore Framework for Application Profiles [SINGAPORE-FRAMEWORK] (see Figure 1). While the approach originally developed as a means of specifying customized applications based on the fifteen elements of the Dublin Core Element Set (e.g., Title, Date, Subject), it has evolved into a generic approach to creating metadata that meets specific local requirements while integrating coherently with other RDF-based metadata.
    Source
    Wissensspeicher in digitalen Räumen: Nachhaltigkeit - Verfügbarkeit - semantische Interoperabilität. Proceedings der 11. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation, Konstanz, 20. bis 22. Februar 2008. Hrsg.: J. Sieglerschmidt u. H.P.Ohly
    Type
    a
  8. Franklin, R.A.: Re-inventing subject access for the semantic web (2003) 0.02
    0.021290656 = product of:
      0.042581312 = sum of:
        0.042581312 = sum of:
          0.008935366 = weight(_text_:a in 2556) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.008935366 = score(doc=2556,freq=12.0), product of:
              0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = queryNorm
              0.18723148 = fieldWeight in 2556, product of:
                3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                  12.0 = termFreq=12.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2556)
          0.033645947 = weight(_text_:22 in 2556) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.033645947 = score(doc=2556,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2556, 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=2556)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    First generation scholarly research on the Web lacked a firm system of authority control. Second generation Web research is beginning to model subject access with library science principles of bibliographic control and cataloguing. Harnessing the Web and organising the intellectual content with standards and controlled vocabulary provides precise search and retrieval capability, increasing relevance and efficient use of technology. Dublin Core metadata standards permit a full evaluation and cataloguing of Web resources appropriate to highly specific research needs and discovery. Current research points to a type of structure based on a system of faceted classification. This system allows the semantic and syntactic relationships to be defined. Controlled vocabulary, such as the Library of Congress Subject Headings, can be assigned, not in a hierarchical structure, but rather as descriptive facets of relating concepts. Web design features such as this are adding value to discovery and filtering out data that lack authority. The system design allows for scalability and extensibility, two technical features that are integral to future development of the digital library and resource discovery.
    Date
    30.12.2008 18:22:46
    Type
    a
  9. Zavalina, O.; Palmer, C.L.; Jackson, A.S.; Han, M.-J.: Assessing descriptive substance in free-text collection-level metadata (2008) 0.02
    0.021290656 = product of:
      0.042581312 = sum of:
        0.042581312 = sum of:
          0.008935366 = weight(_text_:a in 2647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.008935366 = score(doc=2647,freq=12.0), product of:
              0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = queryNorm
              0.18723148 = fieldWeight in 2647, product of:
                3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                  12.0 = termFreq=12.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2647)
          0.033645947 = weight(_text_:22 in 2647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.033645947 = score(doc=2647,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2647, 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=2647)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Collection-level metadata has the potential to provide important information about the features and purpose of individual collections. This paper reports on a content analysis of collection records in an aggregation of cultural heritage collections. The findings show that the free-text Description field often provides more accurate and complete representation of subjects and object types than the specified fields. Properties such as importance, uniqueness, comprehensiveness, provenance, and creator are articulated, as well as other vital contextual information about the intentions of a collector and the value of a collection, as a whole, for scholarly users. The results demonstrate that the semantically rich free-text Description field is essential to understanding the context of collections in large aggregations and can serve as a source of data for enhancing and customizing controlled vocabularies.
    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
    Type
    a
  10. Kurth, M.; Ruddy, D.; Rupp, N.: Repurposing MARC metadata : using digital project experience to develop a metadata management design (2004) 0.02
    0.020901391 = product of:
      0.041802783 = sum of:
        0.041802783 = sum of:
          0.008156837 = weight(_text_:a in 4748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.008156837 = score(doc=4748,freq=10.0), product of:
              0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = queryNorm
              0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 4748, product of:
                3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                  10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4748)
          0.033645947 = weight(_text_:22 in 4748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.033645947 = score(doc=4748,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4748, 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=4748)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Metadata and information technology staff in libraries that are building digital collections typically extract and manipulate MARC metadata sets to provide access to digital content via non-MARC schemes. Metadata processing in these libraries involves defining the relationships between metadata schemes, moving metadata between schemes, and coordinating the intellectual activity and physical resources required to create and manipulate metadata. Actively managing the non-MARC metadata resources used to build digital collections is something most of these libraries have only begun to do. This article proposes strategies for managing MARC metadata repurposing efforts as the first step in a coordinated approach to library metadata management. Guided by lessons learned from Cornell University library mapping and transformation activities, the authors apply the literature of data resource management to library metadata management and propose a model for managing MARC metadata repurposing processes through the implementation of a metadata management design.
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.144-152
    Type
    a
  11. Hooland, S. van; Bontemps, Y.; Kaufman, S.: Answering the call for more accountability : applying data profiling to museum metadata (2008) 0.02
    0.020901391 = product of:
      0.041802783 = sum of:
        0.041802783 = sum of:
          0.008156837 = weight(_text_:a in 2644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.008156837 = score(doc=2644,freq=10.0), product of:
              0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = queryNorm
              0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 2644, product of:
                3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                  10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2644)
          0.033645947 = weight(_text_:22 in 2644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.033645947 = score(doc=2644,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2644, 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=2644)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Although the issue of metadata quality is recognized as an important topic within the metadata research community, the cultural heritage sector has been slow to develop methodologies, guidelines and tools for addressing this topic in practice. This paper concentrates on metadata quality specifically within the museum sector and describes the potential of data-profiling techniques for metadata quality evaluation. A case study illustrates the application of a generalpurpose data-profiling tool on a large collection of metadata records from an ethnographic collection. After an analysis of the results of the case-study the paper reviews further steps in our research and presents the implementation of a metadata quality tool within an open-source collection management software.
    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
    Type
    a
  12. Yee, R.; Beaubien, R.: ¬A preliminary crosswalk from METS to IMS content packaging (2004) 0.02
    0.02047082 = product of:
      0.04094164 = sum of:
        0.04094164 = sum of:
          0.007295696 = weight(_text_:a in 4752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.007295696 = score(doc=4752,freq=8.0), product of:
              0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = queryNorm
              0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 4752, product of:
                2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                  8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4752)
          0.033645947 = weight(_text_:22 in 4752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.033645947 = score(doc=4752,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4752, 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=4752)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    As educational technology becomes pervasive, demand will grow for library content to be incorporated into courseware. Among the barriers impeding interoperability between libraries and educational tools is the difference in specifications commonly used for the exchange of digital objects and metadata. Among libraries, Metadata Encoding and Transmission Standard (METS) is a new but increasingly popular standard; the IMS content-package (IMS-CP) plays a parallel role in educational technology. This article describes how METS-encoded library content can be converted into digital objects for IMS-compliant systems through an XSLT-based crosswalk. The conceptual models behind METS and IMS-CP are compared, the design and limitations of an XSLT-based translation are described, and the crosswalks are related to other techniques to enhance interoperability.
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1, S.69-81
    Type
    a
  13. Renear, A.H.; Wickett, K.M.; Urban, R.J.; Dubin, D.; Shreeves, S.L.: Collection/item metadata relationships (2008) 0.02
    0.02047082 = product of:
      0.04094164 = sum of:
        0.04094164 = sum of:
          0.007295696 = weight(_text_:a in 2623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.007295696 = score(doc=2623,freq=8.0), product of:
              0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = queryNorm
              0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 2623, product of:
                2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                  8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2623)
          0.033645947 = weight(_text_:22 in 2623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.033645947 = score(doc=2623,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2623, 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=2623)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Contemporary retrieval systems, which search across collections, usually ignore collection-level metadata. Alternative approaches, exploiting collection-level information, will require an understanding of the various kinds of relationships that can obtain between collection-level and item-level metadata. This paper outlines the problem and describes a project that is developing a logic-based framework for classifying collection/item metadata relationships. This framework will support (i) metadata specification developers defining metadata elements, (ii) metadata creators describing objects, and (iii) system designers implementing systems that take advantage of collection-level metadata. We present three examples of collection/item metadata relationship categories, attribute/value-propagation, value-propagation, and value-constraint and show that even in these simple cases a precise formulation requires modal notions in addition to first-order logic. These formulations are related to recent work in information retrieval and ontology evaluation.
    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
    Type
    a
  14. DeZelar-Tiedman, C.: Exploring user-contributed metadata's potential to enhance access to literary works (2011) 0.02
    0.02047082 = product of:
      0.04094164 = sum of:
        0.04094164 = sum of:
          0.007295696 = weight(_text_:a in 2595) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.007295696 = score(doc=2595,freq=8.0), product of:
              0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = queryNorm
              0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 2595, product of:
                2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                  8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2595)
          0.033645947 = weight(_text_:22 in 2595) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.033645947 = score(doc=2595,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2595, 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=2595)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Academic libraries have moved toward providing social networking features, such as tagging, in their library catalogs. To explore whether user tags can enhance access to individual literary works, the author obtained a sample of individual works of English and American literature from the twentieth and twenty-first centuries from a large academic library catalog and searched them in LibraryThing. The author compared match rates, the availability of subject headings and tags across various literary forms, and the terminology used in tags versus controlled-vocabulary headings on a subset of records. In addition, she evaluated the usefulness of available LibraryThing tags for the library catalog records that lacked subject headings. Options for utilizing the subject terms available in sources outside the local catalog also are discussed.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Type
    a
  15. Keith, C.: Using XSLT to manipulate MARC metadata (2004) 0.02
    0.019982103 = product of:
      0.039964207 = sum of:
        0.039964207 = sum of:
          0.006318258 = weight(_text_:a in 4747) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.006318258 = score(doc=4747,freq=6.0), product of:
              0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = queryNorm
              0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 4747, product of:
                2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                  6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4747)
          0.033645947 = weight(_text_:22 in 4747) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.033645947 = score(doc=4747,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4747, 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=4747)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This paper describes the MARCXML architecture implemented at the Library of Congress. It gives an overview of the component pieces of the architecture, including the MARCXML schema and the MARCXML toolkit, while giving a brief tutorial on their use. Several different applications of the architecture and tools are discussed to illustrate the features of the toolkit being developed thus far. Nearly any metadata format can take advantage of the features of the toolkit, and the process of the toolkit enabling a new format is discussed. Finally, this paper intends to foster new ideas with regards to the transformation of descriptive metadata, especially using XML tools. In this paper the following conventions will be used: MARC21 will refer to MARC 21 records in the ISO 2709 record structure used today; MARCXML will refer to MARC 21 records in an XML structure.
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.122-130
    Type
    a
  16. MARC and metadata : METS, MODS, and MARCXML: current and future implications (2004) 0.02
    0.019626802 = product of:
      0.039253604 = sum of:
        0.039253604 = product of:
          0.07850721 = sum of:
            0.07850721 = weight(_text_:22 in 7196) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07850721 = score(doc=7196,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041389145 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 7196, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=7196)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1
  17. MARC and metadata : METS, MODS, and MARCXML: current and future implications part 2 (2004) 0.02
    0.019626802 = product of:
      0.039253604 = sum of:
        0.039253604 = product of:
          0.07850721 = sum of:
            0.07850721 = weight(_text_:22 in 2841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07850721 = score(doc=2841,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041389145 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 2841, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2841)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2
  18. Sutton, S.A.; Golder, D.: Achievement Standards Network (ASN) : an application profile for mapping K-12 educational resources to achievement (2008) 0.02
    0.019402392 = product of:
      0.038804784 = sum of:
        0.038804784 = sum of:
          0.005158836 = weight(_text_:a in 2636) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.005158836 = score(doc=2636,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = queryNorm
              0.10809815 = fieldWeight in 2636, 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=2636)
          0.033645947 = weight(_text_:22 in 2636) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.033645947 = score(doc=2636,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = 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)
    
    Abstract
    This paper describes metadata development of an application profile for the National Science Digital Library (NSDL) Achievement Standards Network (ASN) in the United States. The ASN is a national repository of machine-readable achievement standards modeled in RDF that shape teaching and learning in the various states. We describe the nature of the ASN metadata and the various uses to which that metadata is applied including the alignment of the standards of one state to those of another and the correlation of those standards to educational resources in support of resource discovery and retrieval.
    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
    Type
    a
  19. Wartburg, K. von; Sibille, C.; Aliverti, C.: Metadata collaboration between the Swiss National Library and research institutions in the field of Swiss historiography (2019) 0.02
    0.019402392 = product of:
      0.038804784 = sum of:
        0.038804784 = sum of:
          0.005158836 = weight(_text_:a in 5272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.005158836 = score(doc=5272,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = queryNorm
              0.10809815 = fieldWeight in 5272, 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=5272)
          0.033645947 = weight(_text_:22 in 5272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.033645947 = score(doc=5272,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5272, 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=5272)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This article presents examples of metadata collaborations between the Swiss National Library (NL) and research institutions in the field of Swiss historiography. The NL publishes the Bibliography on Swiss History (BSH). In order to meet the demands of its research community, the NL has improved the accessibility and interoperability of the BSH database. Moreover, the BSH takes part in metadata projects such as Metagrid, a web service linking different historical databases. Other metadata collaborations with partners in the historical field such as the Law Sources Foundation (LSF) will position the BSH as an indispensable literature hub for publications on Swiss history.
    Date
    30. 5.2019 19:22:49
    Type
    a
  20. Cho, H.; Donovan, A.; Lee, J.H.: Art in an algorithm : a taxonomy for describing video game visual styles (2018) 0.02
    0.018825607 = product of:
      0.037651215 = sum of:
        0.037651215 = sum of:
          0.0096129235 = weight(_text_:a in 4218) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.0096129235 = score(doc=4218,freq=20.0), product of:
              0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = queryNorm
              0.20142901 = fieldWeight in 4218, product of:
                4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                  20.0 = termFreq=20.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4218)
          0.028038291 = weight(_text_:22 in 4218) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.028038291 = score(doc=4218,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.14493774 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041389145 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4218, 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=4218)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The discovery and retrieval of video games in library and information systems is, by and large, dependent on a limited set of descriptive metadata. Noticeably missing from this metadata are classifications of visual style-despite the overwhelmingly visual nature of most video games and the interest in visual style among video game users. One explanation for this paucity is the difficulty in eliciting consistent judgements about visual style, likely due to subjective interpretations of terminology and a lack of demonstrable testing for coinciding judgements. This study presents a taxonomy of video game visual styles constructed from the findings of a 22-participant cataloging user study of visual styles. A detailed description of the study, and its value and shortcomings, are presented along with reflections about the challenges of cultivating consensus about visual style in video games. The high degree of overall agreement in the user study demonstrates the potential value of a descriptor like visual style and the use of a cataloging study in developing visual style taxonomies. The resulting visual style taxonomy, the methods and analysis described herein may help improve the organization and retrieval of video games and possibly other visual materials like graphic designs, illustrations, and animations.
    Type
    a

Years

Types

  • a 469
  • el 66
  • m 19
  • s 13
  • n 3
  • b 2
  • x 1
  • More… Less…

Subjects