Search (9 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Auszeichnungssprachen"
  1. Ioannides, D.: XML schema languages : beyond DTD (2000) 0.04 
    0.042908456 = product of:
  0.08581691 = sum of:
    0.08581691 = product of:
      0.12872536 = sum of:
        0.08928455 = weight(_text_:universal in 720) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08928455 = score(doc=720,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25562882 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.268782 = idf(docFreq=618, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04851763 = queryNorm
            0.3492742 = fieldWeight in 720, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.268782 = idf(docFreq=618, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=720)
        0.039440814 = weight(_text_:22 in 720) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039440814 = score(doc=720,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16990048 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04851763 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 720, 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=720)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The flexibility and extensibility of XML have largely contributed to its wide acceptance beyond the traditional realm of SGML. Yet, there is still one more obstacle to be overcome before XML is able to become the evangelized universal data/document format. The obstacle is posed by the limitations of the legacy standard for constraining the contents of an XML document. The traditionally used DTD (document type definition) format does not lend itself to be used in the wide variety of applications XML is capable of handling. The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) has charged the XML schema working group with the task of developing a schema language to replace DTD. This XML schema language is evolving based on early drafts of XML schema languages. Each one of these early efforts adopted a slightly different approach, but all of them were moving in the same direction.
    Date
    28. 1.2006 19:01:22
  2. Miller, D.R.: XML: Libraries' strategic opportunity (2001) 0.01 
    0.012400633 = product of:
  0.024801265 = sum of:
    0.024801265 = product of:
      0.07440379 = sum of:
        0.07440379 = weight(_text_:universal in 1467) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07440379 = score(doc=1467,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25562882 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.268782 = idf(docFreq=618, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04851763 = queryNorm
            0.29106182 = fieldWeight in 1467, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.268782 = idf(docFreq=618, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1467)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    XML (eXtensible Markup Language) is fast gaining favor as the universal format for data and document exchange -- in effect becoming the lingua franca of the Information Age. Currently, "library information" is at a particular disadvantage on the rapidly evolving World Wide Web. Why? Despite libraries'explorations of web catalogs, scanning projects, digital data repositories, and creation of web pages galore, there remains a digital divide. The core of libraries' data troves are stored in proprietary formats of integrated library systems (ILS) and in the complex and arcane MARC formats -- both restricted chiefly to the province of technical services and systems librarians. Even they are hard-pressed to extract and integrate this wealth of data with resources from outside this rarefied environment. Segregation of library information underlies many difficulties: producing standard bibliographic citations from MARC data, automatically creating new materials lists (including new web resources) on a particular topic, exchanging data with our vendors, and even migrating from one ILS to another. Why do we continue to hobble our potential by embracing these self-imposed limitations? Most ILSs began in libraries, which soon recognized the pitfalls of do-it-yourself solutions. Thus, we wisely anticipated the necessity for standards. However, with the advent of the web, we soon found "our" collections and a flood of new resources appearing in digital format on opposite sides of the divide. If we do not act quickly to integrate library resources with mainstream web resources, we are in grave danger of becoming marginalized
  3. as: XML: Extensible Markup Language : I: Was ist XML? (2001) 0.01 
    0.010955783 = product of:
  0.021911565 = sum of:
    0.021911565 = product of:
      0.06573469 = sum of:
        0.06573469 = weight(_text_:22 in 4950) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06573469 = score(doc=4950,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16990048 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04851763 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4950, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4950)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    30. 3.2003 11:06:22
  4. Salgáné, M.M.: Our electronic era and bibliographic informations computer-related bibliographic data formats, metadata formats and BDML (2005) 0.01 
    0.009920506 = product of:
  0.019841012 = sum of:
    0.019841012 = product of:
      0.059523035 = sum of:
        0.059523035 = weight(_text_:universal in 3005) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.059523035 = score(doc=3005,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25562882 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.268782 = idf(docFreq=618, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04851763 = queryNorm
            0.23284946 = fieldWeight in 3005, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.268782 = idf(docFreq=618, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3005)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Using new communication technologies libraries must face continuously new questions, possibilities and expectations. This study discusses library-related aspects of our electronic era and how computer-related data formats affect bibliographic dataprocessing to give a summary of the most important results. First bibliographic formats for the exchange of bibliographic and related information in the machine-readable form between different types of computer systems were created more than 30 years ago. The evolution of information technologies leads to the improvement of computer systems. In addition to the development of computers and media types Internet has a great influence on data structure as well. Since the introduction of MARC bibliographic format, technology of data exchange between computers and between different computer systems has reached a very sophisticated stage and has contributed to the creation of new standards in this field. Today libraries work with this new infrastructure that induces many challenges. One of the most significant challenges is moving from a relatively homogenous bibliographic environment to a diverse one. Despite these challenges such changes are achievable and necessary to exploit possibilities of new metadata and technologies like the Internet and XML (Extensible Markup Language). XML is an open standard, a universal language for data on the Web. XML is nearly six-years-old standard designed for the description and computer-based management of (semi)-structured data and structured texts. XML gives developers the power to deliver structured data from a wide variety of applications and it is also an ideal format from server-to-server transfer of structured data. XML also isn't limited for Internet use and is an especially valuable tool in the field of library. In fact, XML's main strength - organizing information - makes it perfect for exchanging data between different systems. Tools that work with the XML can be used to process XML records without incurring additional costs associated with one's own software development. In addition, XML is also a suitable format for library web services. The Department of Computer-related Graphic Design and Library and Information Sciences of Debrecen University launched the BDML (Bibliographic Description Markup Language) development project in order to standardize bibliogrphic description with the help of XML.
  5. Schröder, A.: Web der Zukunft : RDF - Der erste Schritt zum semantischen Web 0.01 
    0.008764626 = product of:
  0.017529253 = sum of:
    0.017529253 = product of:
      0.052587755 = sum of:
        0.052587755 = weight(_text_:22 in 1457) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.052587755 = score(doc=1457,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16990048 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04851763 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1457, 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=1457)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Seit dem 22. Februar 1999 ist das Resource Description Framework (RDF) als W3C-Empfehlung verfügbar. Doch was steckt hinter diesem Standard, der das Zeitalter des Semantischen Webs einläuten soll? Was RDF bedeutet, wozu man es einsetzt, welche Vorteile es gegenüber XML hat und wie man RDF anwendet, soll in diesem Artikel erläutert werden.
  6. Patrick, D.A.: XML in der Praxis : Unternehmensübergreifende Vorteile durch Enterprise Content Management (1999) 0.01 
    0.0076690475 = product of:
  0.015338095 = sum of:
    0.015338095 = product of:
      0.046014283 = sum of:
        0.046014283 = weight(_text_:22 in 1461) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046014283 = score(doc=1461,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16990048 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04851763 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1461, 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=1461)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    30. 3.2003 10:50:22
  7. Trotman, A.: Searching structured documents (2004) 0.01 
    0.0076690475 = product of:
  0.015338095 = sum of:
    0.015338095 = product of:
      0.046014283 = sum of:
        0.046014283 = weight(_text_:22 in 2538) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046014283 = score(doc=2538,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16990048 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04851763 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2538, 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=2538)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    14. 8.2004 10:39:22
  8. Vonhoegen, H.: Einstieg in XML (2002) 0.00 
    0.0038345237 = product of:
  0.0076690475 = sum of:
    0.0076690475 = product of:
      0.023007141 = sum of:
        0.023007141 = weight(_text_:22 in 4002) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023007141 = score(doc=4002,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16990048 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04851763 = queryNorm
            0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 4002, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4002)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Footnote
    Rez. in: XML Magazin und Web Services 2003, H.1, S.14 (S. Meyen): "Seit dem 22. Februar 1999 ist das Resource Description Framework (RDF) als W3C-Empfehlung verfügbar. Doch was steckt hinter diesem Standard, der das Zeitalter des Semantischen Webs einläuten soll? Was RDF bedeutet, wozu man es einsetzt, welche Vorteile es gegenüber XML hat und wie man RDF anwendet, soll in diesem Artikel erläutert werden. Schlägt man das Buch auf und beginnt, im EinleitungsKapitel zu schmökern, fällt sogleich ins Auge, dass der Leser nicht mit Lektionen im Stile von "bei XML sind die spitzen Klammern ganz wichtig" belehrt wird, obgleich es sich um ein Buch für Anfänger handelt. Im Gegenteil: Es geht gleich zur Sache und eine gesunde Mischung an Vorkenntnissen wird vorausgesetzt. Wer sich heute für XML interessiert, der hat ja mit 99-prozentiger Wahrscheinlichkeit schon seine einschlägigen Erfahrungen mit HTML und dem Web gemacht und ist kein Newbie in dem Reich der spitzen Klammern und der (einigermaßen) wohlformatierten Dokumente. Und hier liegt eine deutliche Stärke des Werkes Helmut Vonhoegens, der seinen Einsteiger-Leser recht gut einzuschätzen weiß und ihn daher praxisnah und verständlich ans Thema heranführt. Das dritte Kapitel beschäftigt sich mit der Document Type Definition (DTD) und beschreibt deren Einsatzziele und Verwendungsweisen. Doch betont der Autor hier unablässig die Begrenztheit dieses Ansatzes, welche den Ruf nach einem neuen Konzept deutlich macht: XML Schema, welches er im folgenden Kapitel darstellt. Ein recht ausführliches Kapitel widmet sich dann dem relativ aktuellen XML Schema-Konzept und erläutert dessen Vorzüge gegenüber der DTD (Modellierung komplexer Datenstrukturen, Unterstützung zahlreicher Datentypen, Zeichenbegrenzungen u.v.m.). XML Schema legt, so erfährt der Leser, wie die alte DTD, das Vokabular und die zulässige Grammatik eines XML-Dokuments fest, ist aber seinerseits ebenfalls ein XML-Dokument und kann (bzw. sollte) wie jedes andere XML auf Wohlgeformtheit überprüft werden. Weitere Kapitel behandeln die Navigations-Standards XPath, XLink und XPointer, Transformationen mit XSLT und XSL und natürlich die XML-Programmierschnittstellen DOM und SAX. Dabei kommen verschiedene Implementierungen zum Einsatz und erfreulicherweise werden Microsoft-Ansätze auf der einen und Java/Apache-Projekte auf der anderen Seite in ungefähr vergleichbarem Umfang vorgestellt. Im letzten Kapitel schließlich behandelt Vonhoegen die obligatorischen Web Services ("Webdienste") als Anwendungsfall von XML und demonstriert ein kleines C#- und ASP-basiertes Beispiel (das Java-Äquivalent mit Apache Axis fehlt leider). "Einstieg in XML" präsentiert seinen Stoff in klar verständlicher Form und versteht es, seine Leser auf einem guten Niveau "abzuholen". Es bietet einen guten Überblick über die Grundlagen von XML und kann - zumindest derzeit noch - mit recht hoher Aktualität aufwarten."
  9. Anderson, R.; Birbeck, M.; Kay, M.; Livingstone, S.; Loesgen, B.; Martin, D.; Mohr, S.; Ozu, N.; Peat, B.; Pinnock, J.; Stark, P.; Williams, K.: XML professionell : behandelt W3C DOM, SAX, CSS, XSLT, DTDs, XML Schemas, XLink, XPointer, XPath, E-Commerce, BizTalk, B2B, SOAP, WAP, WML (2000) 0.00 
    0.0032867347 = product of:
  0.0065734694 = sum of:
    0.0065734694 = product of:
      0.019720407 = sum of:
        0.019720407 = weight(_text_:22 in 729) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019720407 = score(doc=729,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16990048 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04851763 = queryNorm
            0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 729, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=729)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    22. 6.2005 15:12:11

Authors

Years

Languages

Types

Themes