Search (149 results, page 8 of 8)

0.002920688 = product of:
  0.008762063 = sum of:
    0.008762063 = product of:
      0.026286189 = sum of:
        0.026286189 = weight(_text_:22 in 3524) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026286189 = score(doc=3524,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13588063 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038802754 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3524, 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=3524)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

16.11.2017 13:30:22

0.002920688 = product of:
  0.008762063 = sum of:
    0.008762063 = product of:
      0.026286189 = sum of:
        0.026286189 = weight(_text_:22 in 4218) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026286189 = score(doc=4218,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13588063 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038802754 = 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)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

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.

0.002920688 = product of:
  0.008762063 = sum of:
    0.008762063 = product of:
      0.026286189 = sum of:
        0.026286189 = weight(_text_:22 in 4550) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026286189 = score(doc=4550,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13588063 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038802754 = 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)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

10.11.2018 16:27:22

0.0029125432 = product of:
  0.008737629 = sum of:
    0.008737629 = product of:
      0.017475259 = sum of:
        0.017475259 = weight(_text_:2007 in 339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017475259 = score(doc=339,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1751764 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.514535 = idf(docFreq=1315, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038802754 = queryNorm
            0.099758066 = fieldWeight in 339, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.514535 = idf(docFreq=1315, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=339)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST. 58(2007) no.6., S.909-910 (A.D. Petrou): "A division in metadata definitions for physical objects vs. those for digital resources offered in Chapter 1 is punctuated by the use of broader, more inclusive metadata definitions, such as data about data as well as with the inclusion of more specific metadata definitions intended for networked resources. Intertwined with the book's subject matter, which is to "distinguish traditional cataloguing from metadata activity" (5), the authors' chosen metadata definition is also detailed on page 5 as follows: Thus while granting the validity of the inclusive definition, we concentrate primarily on metadata as it is most commonly thought of both inside and outside of the library community, as "structured information used to find, access, use and manage information resources primarily in a digital environment." (International Encyclopedia of Information and Library Science, 2003) Metadata principles discussed by the authors include modularity, extensibility, refinement and multilingualism. The latter set is followed by seven misconceptions about metadata. Two types of metadata discussed are automatically generated indexes and manually created records. In terms of categories of metadata, the authors present three sets of them as follows: descriptive, structural, and administrative metadata. Chapter 2 focuses on metadata for communities of practice, and is a prelude to content in Chapter 3 where metadata applications, use, and development are presented from the perspective of libraries. Chapter 2 discusses the emergence and impact of metadata on organization and access of online resources from the perspective of communities for which such standards exist and for the need for mapping one standard to another. Discussion focuses on metalanguages, such as Standard Generalized Markup Language (SGML) and eXtensible Markup Language (XML), "capable of embedding descriptive elements within the document markup itself' (25). This discussion falls under syntactic interoperability. For semantic interoperability, HTML and other mark-up languages, such as Text Encoding Initiative (TEI) and Computer Interchange of Museum Information (CIMI), are covered. For structural interoperability, Dublin Core's 15 metadata elements are grouped into three areas: content (title, subject, description, type, source, relation, and coverage), intellectual property (creator, publisher, contributor and rights), and instantiation (date, format, identifier, and language) for discussion.

0.0023577597 = product of:
  0.007073279 = sum of:
    0.007073279 = product of:
      0.021219837 = sum of:
        0.021219837 = weight(_text_:29 in 1254) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021219837 = score(doc=1254,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13649596 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038802754 = queryNorm
            0.15546128 = fieldWeight in 1254, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1254)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science. 29(2003) no.2, S.24-28

0.0023577597 = product of:
  0.007073279 = sum of:
    0.007073279 = product of:
      0.021219837 = sum of:
        0.021219837 = weight(_text_:29 in 5732) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021219837 = score(doc=5732,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13649596 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038802754 = queryNorm
            0.15546128 = fieldWeight in 5732, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5732)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

29. 9.2008 19:13:46

0.0023365503 = product of:
  0.0070096506 = sum of:
    0.0070096506 = product of:
      0.02102895 = sum of:
        0.02102895 = weight(_text_:22 in 1236) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02102895 = score(doc=1236,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13588063 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038802754 = 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)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

26.12.2011 14:01:22

0.0023365503 = product of:
  0.0070096506 = sum of:
    0.0070096506 = product of:
      0.02102895 = sum of:
        0.02102895 = weight(_text_:22 in 367) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02102895 = score(doc=367,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13588063 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038802754 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 367, 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=367)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The proliferation of discipline-specific metadata schemes contributes to artificial barriers that can impede interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research. The authors considered this problem by examining the domains, objectives, and architectures of nine metadata schemes used to document scientific data in the physical, life, and social sciences. They used a mixed-methods content analysis and Greenberg's () metadata objectives, principles, domains, and architectural layout (MODAL) framework, and derived 22 metadata-related goals from textual content describing each metadata scheme. Relationships are identified between the domains (e.g., scientific discipline and type of data) and the categories of scheme objectives. For each strong correlation (>0.6), a Fisher's exact test for nonparametric data was used to determine significance (p < .05). Significant relationships were found between the domains and objectives of the schemes. Schemes describing observational data are more likely to have "scheme harmonization" (compatibility and interoperability with related schemes) as an objective; schemes with the objective "abstraction" (a conceptual model exists separate from the technical implementation) also have the objective "sufficiency" (the scheme defines a minimal amount of information to meet the needs of the community); and schemes with the objective "data publication" do not have the objective "element refinement." The analysis indicates that many metadata-driven goals expressed by communities are independent of scientific discipline or the type of data, although they are constrained by historical community practices and workflows as well as the technological environment at the time of scheme creation. The analysis reveals 11 fundamental metadata goals for metadata documenting scientific data in support of sharing research data across disciplines and domains. The authors report these results and highlight the need for more metadata-related research, particularly in the context of recent funding agency policy changes.

0.0017683199 = product of:
  0.0053049596 = sum of:
    0.0053049596 = product of:
      0.015914878 = sum of:
        0.015914878 = weight(_text_:29 in 732) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015914878 = score(doc=732,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13649596 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038802754 = queryNorm
            0.11659596 = fieldWeight in 732, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=732)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

29. 9.2022 17:57:57