Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × language_ss:"e"
  • × theme_ss:"Normdateien"
  • × type_ss:"el"
  1. Danowski, P.: Authority files and Web 2.0 : Wikipedia and the PND. An Example (2007) 0.04
    0.03588655 = product of:
      0.0717731 = sum of:
        0.056295417 = weight(_text_:deutsche in 1291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056295417 = score(doc=1291,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21579155 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.7224083 = idf(docFreq=1068, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045695234 = queryNorm
            0.26087868 = fieldWeight in 1291, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.7224083 = idf(docFreq=1068, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1291)
        0.015477683 = product of:
          0.030955367 = sum of:
            0.030955367 = weight(_text_:22 in 1291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.030955367 = score(doc=1291,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16001692 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045695234 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1291, 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=1291)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    More and more users index everything on their own in the web 2.0. There are services for links, videos, pictures, books, encyclopaedic articles and scientific articles. All these services are library independent. But must that really be? Can't libraries help with their experience and tools to make user indexing better? On the experience of a project from German language Wikipedia together with the German person authority files (Personen Namen Datei - PND) located at German National Library (Deutsche Nationalbibliothek) I would like to show what is possible. How users can and will use the authority files, if we let them. We will take a look how the project worked and what we can learn for future projects. Conclusions - Authority files can have a role in the web 2.0 - there must be an open interface/ service for retrieval - everything that is indexed on the net with authority files can be easy integrated in a federated search - O'Reilly: You have to found ways that your data get more important that more it will be used
    Content
    Vortrag anlässlich des Workshops: "Extending the multilingual capacity of The European Library in the EDL project Stockholm, Swedish National Library, 22-23 November 2007".
  2. Leth, P.: Subject access - the Swedish approach (2007) 0.01
    0.0092866095 = product of:
      0.037146438 = sum of:
        0.037146438 = product of:
          0.074292876 = sum of:
            0.074292876 = weight(_text_:22 in 131) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.074292876 = score(doc=131,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16001692 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045695234 = queryNorm
                0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 131, 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=131)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Content
    Vortrag anlässlich des Workshops: "Extending the multilingual capacity of The European Library in the EDL project Stockholm, Swedish National Library, 22-23 November 2007".
  3. Hengel, C.: Mapping name authorities : the Virtual International Authority File (VIAF) (2007) 0.01
    0.0092866095 = product of:
      0.037146438 = sum of:
        0.037146438 = product of:
          0.074292876 = sum of:
            0.074292876 = weight(_text_:22 in 1266) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.074292876 = score(doc=1266,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16001692 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045695234 = queryNorm
                0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 1266, 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=1266)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Content
    Vortrag anlässlich des Workshops: "Extending the multilingual capacity of The European Library in the EDL project Stockholm, Swedish National Library, 22-23 November 2007".
  4. Goossens, P.: Authority control : trends and challenges (2007) 0.01
    0.0092866095 = product of:
      0.037146438 = sum of:
        0.037146438 = product of:
          0.074292876 = sum of:
            0.074292876 = weight(_text_:22 in 1290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.074292876 = score(doc=1290,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16001692 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045695234 = queryNorm
                0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 1290, 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=1290)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Content
    Vortrag anlässlich des Workshops: "Extending the multilingual capacity of The European Library in the EDL project Stockholm, Swedish National Library, 22-23 November 2007".
  5. Kaiser, M.; Lieder, H.J.; Majcen, K.; Vallant, H.: New ways of sharing and using authority information : the LEAF project (2003) 0.01
    0.007036927 = product of:
      0.028147709 = sum of:
        0.028147709 = weight(_text_:deutsche in 1166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028147709 = score(doc=1166,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21579155 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.7224083 = idf(docFreq=1068, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045695234 = queryNorm
            0.13043934 = fieldWeight in 1166, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.7224083 = idf(docFreq=1068, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1166)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    This article presents an overview of the LEAF project (Linking and Exploring Authority Files)1, which has set out to provide a framework for international, collaborative work in the sector of authority data with respect to authority control. Elaborating the virtues of authority control in today's Web environment is an almost futile exercise, since so much has been said and written about it in the last few years.2 The World Wide Web is generally understood to be poorly structured-both with regard to content and to locating required information. Highly structured databases might be viewed as small islands of precision within this chaotic environment. Though the Web in general or any particular structured database would greatly benefit from increased authority control, it should be noted that our following considerations only refer to authority control with regard to databases of "memory institutions" (i.e., libraries, archives, and museums). Moreover, when talking about authority records, we exclusively refer to personal name authority records that describe a specific person. Although different types of authority records could indeed be used in similar ways to the ones presented in this article, discussing those different types is outside the scope of both the LEAF project and this article. Personal name authority records-as are all other "authorities"-are maintained as separate records and linked to various kinds of descriptive records. Name authority records are usually either kept in independent databases or in separate tables in the database containing the descriptive records. This practice points at a crucial benefit: by linking any number of descriptive records to an authorized name record, the records related to this entity are collocated in the database. Variant forms of the authorized name are referenced in the authority records and thus ensure the consistency of the database while enabling search and retrieval operations that produce accurate results. On one hand, authority control may be viewed as a positive prerequisite of a consistent catalogue; on the other, the creation of new authority records is a very time consuming and expensive undertaking. As a consequence, various models of providing access to existing authority records have emerged: the Library of Congress and the French National Library (Bibliothèque nationale de France), for example, make their authority records available to all via a web-based search service.3 In Germany, the Personal Name Authority File (PND, Personennamendatei4) maintained by the German National Library (Die Deutsche Bibliothek, Frankfurt/Main) offers a different approach to shared access: within a closed network, participating institutions have online access to their pooled data. The number of recent projects and initiatives that have addressed the issue of authority control in one way or another is considerable.5 Two important current initiatives should be mentioned here: The Name Authority Cooperative (NACO) and Virtual International Authority File (VIAF).