Search (74 results, page 4 of 4)

0.0016993409 = product of:
  0.0033986818 = sum of:
    0.0033986818 = product of:
      0.0067973635 = sum of:
        0.0067973635 = weight(_text_:a in 29) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0067973635 = score(doc=29,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.14243183 = fieldWeight in 29, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=29)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

When we first began discussing with Peter Paulson, executive director of OCLC Forest Press, the possibility of translating into Spanish the twentieth edition of the Dewey Decimal Classification, and even during the initial contact we had with the late John A. Humphry, we knew that the project would be a complex and hard task. The reality was that the project exceeded all expectations and was much more complex and difficult than we had anticipated. This not only made it more interesting for those who participated in its development, but also made it an extraordinary challenge, especially due to the time frame initially foreseen for its development: eight to ten months. Once we agreed with Peter Paulson on the basic terms of the project, Rojas Eberhard Editores was able to convince Information Handling Services (a company located in Denver, Colorado, known worldwide for its products and services in the field of technological information) to participate with us in this translation and publication project. Information Handling Services channeled its participation through its subsidiary in Mexico, to facilitate the integration of the project into the main zone of influence of the final product: Latin America.

Source

Dewey Decimal Classification: Edition 21 and International perspectives: papers from a workshop presented at the General Conference of the International Deferation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA), Beijing, China, August 29, 1996. Ed.: L.M. Chan and J.S. Mitchell

Type

a

0.0016822617 = product of:
  0.0033645234 = sum of:
    0.0033645234 = product of:
      0.006729047 = sum of:
        0.006729047 = weight(_text_:a in 6067) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006729047 = score(doc=6067,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.14100032 = fieldWeight in 6067, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=6067)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This final report defines the problem of multilingual subject access, summarises the work carried out by the CoBRA+ working group on multilingual subject access from autumn 1997 until February 1999 and its results, identifies and discusses issues to be resolved, and presents a proposal for a prototype to the directors of the institutions concerned. For a summary of results, and the proposal, see 'CoBRA+ working group on multilingual subject access: proposals for discussion, March 18th 1999. This report will be distributed to members of the CENL and posted on the GABRIEL website. Genevieve Clavel has compiled it on the basis of the group's reports, discussions within the group and comments provided by the partners.

Content

Backgrund to the study: The question of multilingual access to bibliographic databases affects not only searchers in countries in which several languages are spoken such as Switzerland, but also all those who search material in databases containing material in more than one language, which is the case in the majority of scientific or research databases. he growth of networks means that we can easily access catalogues outside our own immediate circle - in another town, another country, another continent. In doing so we encounter problems concerning not only search interfaces, but also concerning subject access or even author access in another language. In France for example, each document, independently of the language in which it has been written, is indexed using a French-language subject heading language. Thus, in order to search by subject headings for documents written in English or German, held in the Bibliothèque nationale de France, the researcher from abroad has to master the French language. In theory, the indexer should be able to analyse a document and assign headings in his/her native language, while the user should be able to search in his/her native language. The language of the document itself should have no influence on the language of the subject heading language used for indexing nor on the language used for searching. (Practically speaking of course, there are restrictions, since there is a limit to the number of languages in which subject headings languages could be maintained and thus in which the user may search.) In the example below, we are concerned with three languages: German, French and English. If we can imagine a system in which there are equivalents among subject headings in these three languages, the following scenario may be envisaged: a German-speaking indexer will use German-language subject headings to index all the documents received, regardless of the language in which they are written. The user may search for these documents by entering subject headings in German, but also in French or in English, thanks to the equivalents that have been established, in French or in English without the necessity to know the other languages or the structure of the other SHLs. Ideally, this approach should not be confined to one database, but would allow the different databases to be brought together in virtual system: an English-speaking user in London should be able to search the database of the Deutsche Bibliothek in Frankfurt using English-language headings, and retrieving documents which have been indexed using the German subject headings' list.

0.0015795645 = product of:
  0.003159129 = sum of:
    0.003159129 = product of:
      0.006318258 = sum of:
        0.006318258 = weight(_text_:a in 7404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006318258 = score(doc=7404,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 7404, 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=7404)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The Institutions of the European Communities produce document-oriented databases based on publications and documents distributed either by the Office for Official Publications of the European Communities or by the individual EC institutions themselves. These databases are known under the names of ABEL, CATEL, CELEX, CORDIS RTD publications, ECLAS, EPOQUE, EURISTOTE, RAPID and SCAD and are available via hosts such as EUROBASES, ECHO and the Office for Official Publications. Until the establishment of the EUROCAT project, no single database held a comprehensive and complete collection of all European Community documents and publications. Describes the work on integrating and harmonising the data from the databases to produce the multilingual EUROCAT database using MS-DOS based software. The resulting database will be available on CD-ROM

Type

a

0.0015795645 = product of:
  0.003159129 = sum of:
    0.003159129 = product of:
      0.006318258 = sum of:
        0.006318258 = weight(_text_:a in 1302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006318258 = score(doc=1302,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 1302, 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=1302)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This paper examines the reasons why approaches to facilitate document retrieval which apply AI (Artificial Intelligence) or Expert Systems techniques, relying on so-called "natural language" query statements from the end-user will result in sub-optimal solutions. It does so by reflecting on the nature of language and the fundamental problems in document retrieval. Support is given to the work of thesaurus builders and indexers with illustrations of how their work may be utilised in a generally applicable computer-based document retrieval system using Multilingual MenUSE software. The EuroMenUSE interface providing multilingual document access to EPOQUE, the European Parliament's Online Query System is described.

Source

Information as a Global Commodity - Communication, Processing and Use (CAIS/ACSI '93) : 21st Annual Conference Canadian Association for Information Science, Antigonish, Nova Scotia, Canada. July 1993

Type

a

0.0015199365 = product of:
  0.003039873 = sum of:
    0.003039873 = product of:
      0.006079746 = sum of:
        0.006079746 = weight(_text_:a in 4259) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006079746 = score(doc=4259,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 4259, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4259)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a

0.0015199365 = product of:
  0.003039873 = sum of:
    0.003039873 = product of:
      0.006079746 = sum of:
        0.006079746 = weight(_text_:a in 1130) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006079746 = score(doc=1130,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 1130, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1130)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a

0.0015199365 = product of:
  0.003039873 = sum of:
    0.003039873 = product of:
      0.006079746 = sum of:
        0.006079746 = weight(_text_:a in 4710) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006079746 = score(doc=4710,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 4710, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4710)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a

0.0015199365 = product of:
  0.003039873 = sum of:
    0.003039873 = product of:
      0.006079746 = sum of:
        0.006079746 = weight(_text_:a in 4186) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006079746 = score(doc=4186,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 4186, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4186)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a

0.0015199365 = product of:
  0.003039873 = sum of:
    0.003039873 = product of:
      0.006079746 = sum of:
        0.006079746 = weight(_text_:a in 1261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006079746 = score(doc=1261,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 1261, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1261)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

We are rapidly constructing an extensive network infrastructure for moving information across national boundaries, but much remains to be done before linguistic barriers can be surmounted as effectively as geographic ones. Users seeking information from a digital library could benefit from the ability to query large collections once using a single language, even when more than one language is present in the collection. If the information they locate is not available in a language that they can read, some form of translation will be needed. At present, multilingual thesauri such as EUROVOC help to address this challenge by facilitating controlled vocabulary search using terms from several languages, and services such as INSPEC produce English abstracts for documents in other languages. On the other hand, support for free text searching across languages is not yet widely deployed, and fully automatic machine translation is presently neither sufficiently fast nor sufficiently accurate to adequately support interactive cross-language information seeking. An active and rapidly growing research community has coalesced around these and other related issues, applying techniques drawn from several fields - notably information retrieval and natural language processing - to provide access to large multilingual collections.

Type

a

0.001407481 = product of:
  0.002814962 = sum of:
    0.002814962 = product of:
      0.005629924 = sum of:
        0.005629924 = weight(_text_:a in 1263) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005629924 = score(doc=1263,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.11796933 = fieldWeight in 1263, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1263)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The Internet would not be very useful if communication were limited to textual exchanges between speakers of English located in the United States. Rather, its value lies in its ability to enable people from multiple nations, speaking multiple languages, to employ multiple media in interacting with each other. While computer networks broke through national boundaries long ago, they remain much more effective for textual communication than for exchanges of sound, images, or mixed media -- and more effective for communication in English than for exchanges in most other languages, much less interactions involving multiple languages. Supporting searching and display in multiple languages is an increasingly important issue for all digital libraries accessible on the Internet. Even if a digital library contains materials in only one language, the content needs to be searchable and displayable on computers in countries speaking other languages. We need to exchange data between digital libraries, whether in a single language or in multiple languages. Data exchanges may be large batch updates or interactive hyperlinks. In any of these cases, character sets must be represented in a consistent manner if exchanges are to succeed. Issues of interoperability, portability, and data exchange related to multi-lingual character sets have received surprisingly little attention in the digital library community or in discussions of standards for information infrastructure, except in Europe. The landmark collection of papers on Standards Policy for Information Infrastructure, for example, contains no discussion of multi-lingual issues except for a passing reference to the Unicode standard. The goal of this short essay is to draw attention to the multi-lingual issues involved in designing digital libraries accessible on the Internet. Many of the multi-lingual design issues parallel those of multi-media digital libraries, a topic more familiar to most readers of D-Lib Magazine. This essay draws examples from multi-media DLs to illustrate some of the urgent design challenges in creating a globally distributed network serving people who speak many languages other than English. First we introduce some general issues of medium, culture, and language, then discuss the design challenges in the transition from local to global systems, lastly addressing technical matters. The technical issues involve the choice of character sets to represent languages, similar to the choices made in representing images or sound. However, the scale of the language problem is far greater. Standards for multi-media representation are being adopted fairly rapidly, in parallel with the availability of multi-media content in electronic form. By contrast, we have hundreds (and sometimes thousands) of years worth of textual materials in hundreds of languages, created long before data encoding standards existed. Textual content from past and present is being encoded in language and application-specific representations that are difficult to exchange without losing data -- if they exchange at all. We illustrate the multi-language DL challenge with examples drawn from the research library community, which typically handles collections of materials in 400 or so languages. These are problems faced not only by developers of digital libraries, but by those who develop and manage any communication technology that crosses national or linguistic boundaries.

Type

a

0.001289709 = product of:
  0.002579418 = sum of:
    0.002579418 = product of:
      0.005158836 = sum of:
        0.005158836 = weight(_text_:a in 7406) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005158836 = score(doc=7406,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.10809815 = fieldWeight in 7406, 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=7406)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a

0.001289709 = product of:
  0.002579418 = sum of:
    0.002579418 = product of:
      0.005158836 = sum of:
        0.005158836 = weight(_text_:a in 5350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005158836 = score(doc=5350,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.10809815 = fieldWeight in 5350, 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=5350)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The use of title words, the combination of these through the use of logic operators, and the possibility of truncating them when carrying out subject searches, are some of the search options that have been incorporated into the online catalog. Several arguments in favor of these options have been expressed which state that they represent an approach for the use of natural language and that they facilitate information retrieval. However, expressed arguments against them that support the necessity of using controlled language to obtain more precision in search results also exist. This paper reports the main results from a study whose objective was to compare advantages and disadvantages of retrieval by keywords from the title and by subject headings included in the records of LIBRUNAM, an online catalog containing records for English and Spanish items at the National Autonomous University of Mexico.

Type

a

0.0012159493 = product of:
  0.0024318986 = sum of:
    0.0024318986 = product of:
      0.004863797 = sum of:
        0.004863797 = weight(_text_:a in 540) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.004863797 = score(doc=540,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 540, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=540)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a

0.0010639556 = product of:
  0.0021279112 = sum of:
    0.0021279112 = product of:
      0.0042558224 = sum of:
        0.0042558224 = weight(_text_:a in 7207) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0042558224 = score(doc=7207,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.089176424 = fieldWeight in 7207, 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=7207)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a