Search (75 results, page 1 of 4)

  • × theme_ss:"Datenformate"
  1. Ranta, J.A.: Queens Borough Public Library's Guidelines for cataloging community information (1996) 0.05
    0.053414337 = product of:
      0.106828675 = sum of:
        0.106828675 = sum of:
          0.06366988 = weight(_text_:subject in 6523) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.06366988 = score(doc=6523,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
                0.04550679 = queryNorm
              0.3911902 = fieldWeight in 6523, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6523)
          0.043158792 = weight(_text_:22 in 6523) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.043158792 = score(doc=6523,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15935703 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.04550679 = queryNorm
              0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 6523, 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=6523)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Currently, few resources exist to guide libraries in the cataloguing of community information using the new USMARC Format for Cammunity Information (1993). In developing a community information database, Queens Borough Public Library, New York City, formulated their own cataloguing procedures for applying AACR2, LoC File Interpretations, and USMARC Format for Community Information to community information. Their practices include entering corporate names directly whenever possible and assigning LC subject headings for classes of persons and topics, adding neighbourhood level geographic subdivisions. The guidelines were specially designed to aid non cataloguers in cataloguing community information and have enabled library to maintain consistency in handling corporate names and in assigning subject headings, while creating database that is highly accessible to library staff and users
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) no.2, S.51-69
  2. Tell, B.: On MARC and natural text searching : a review of Pauline Cochrane's inspirational thinking grafted onto a Swedish spy on library matters (2000) 0.05
    0.045783717 = product of:
      0.091567434 = sum of:
        0.091567434 = sum of:
          0.054574184 = weight(_text_:subject in 1183) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.054574184 = score(doc=1183,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
                0.04550679 = queryNorm
              0.33530587 = fieldWeight in 1183, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1183)
          0.03699325 = weight(_text_:22 in 1183) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03699325 = score(doc=1183,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15935703 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.04550679 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1183, 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=1183)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The following discussion is in appreciation of the invaluable inspirations Pauline Cochrane, by her acumen and perspicacity, has implanted into my thinking regarding various applications of library and information science, especially those involving machine-readable records and subject categorization. It is indeed an honor for me at my age to be offered to contribute to Pauline's Festschrift when instead I should be concerned about my forthcoming obituary. In the following, I must give some Background to what formed my thinking before my involvement in the field and thus before I encountered Pauline.
    Date
    22. 9.1997 19:16:05
    Source
    Saving the time of the library user through subject access innovation: Papers in honor of Pauline Atherton Cochrane. Ed.: W.J. Wheeler
  3. Mönch, C.; Aalberg, T.: Automatic conversion from MARC to FRBR (2003) 0.03
    0.03149293 = product of:
      0.06298586 = sum of:
        0.06298586 = sum of:
          0.032158148 = weight(_text_:subject in 2422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.032158148 = score(doc=2422,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
                0.04550679 = queryNorm
              0.19758089 = fieldWeight in 2422, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2422)
          0.03082771 = weight(_text_:22 in 2422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03082771 = score(doc=2422,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15935703 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.04550679 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2422, 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=2422)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Catalogs have for centuries been the main tool that enabled users to search for items in a library by author, title, or subject. A catalog can be interpreted as a set of bibliographic records, where each record acts as a surrogate for a publication. Every record describes a specific publication and contains the data that is used to create the indexes of search systems and the information that is presented to the user. Bibliographic records are often captured and exchanged by the use of the MARC format. Although there are numerous rdquodialectsrdquo of the MARC format in use, they are usually crafted on the same basis and are interoperable with each other -to a certain extent. The data model of a MARC-based catalog, however, is rdquo[...] extremely non-normalized with excessive replication of datardquo [1]. For instance, a literary work that exists in numerous editions and translations is likely to yield a large result set because each edition or translation is represented by an individual record, that is unrelated to other records that describe the same work.
    Source
    Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 7th European Conference, proceedings / ECDL 2003, Trondheim, Norway, August 17-22, 2003
  4. Jimenez, V.O.R.: Nuevas perspectivas para la catalogacion : metadatos ver MARC (1999) 0.03
    0.02615818 = product of:
      0.05231636 = sum of:
        0.05231636 = product of:
          0.10463272 = sum of:
            0.10463272 = weight(_text_:22 in 5743) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.10463272 = score(doc=5743,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.15935703 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04550679 = queryNorm
                0.6565931 = fieldWeight in 5743, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5743)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    30. 3.2002 19:45:22
    Source
    Revista Española de Documentaçion Cientifica. 22(1999) no.2, S.198-219
  5. MARC and metadata : METS, MODS, and MARCXML: current and future implications (2004) 0.02
    0.024662167 = product of:
      0.049324334 = sum of:
        0.049324334 = product of:
          0.09864867 = sum of:
            0.09864867 = weight(_text_:22 in 2840) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09864867 = score(doc=2840,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15935703 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04550679 = 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
  6. Greenberg, J.: Subject control of ephemera : MARC format options (1996) 0.02
    0.022510704 = product of:
      0.045021407 = sum of:
        0.045021407 = product of:
          0.090042815 = sum of:
            0.090042815 = weight(_text_:subject in 543) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.090042815 = score(doc=543,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04550679 = queryNorm
                0.5532265 = fieldWeight in 543, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=543)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Provides an overview of the MARC format and the structure of the bibliographic MARC record. Discusses the MARC-AMC and MARC-VM formats as options for controlling ephemera, lists popular controlled vocabulary tools for subject control over ephemera material and examines subject analysis methodologies. Considers the specific MARC field options for the subject control of ephemera and provides 3 worked examples. Concludes that, while it can be argued that the MARC format does not provide an ideal control system for ephemera, it does offer an excellent means of controlling ephemera in the online environment and permits ephemera to be intellectually linked with related materials of all formats
  7. MARC and metadata : METS, MODS, and MARCXML: current and future implications (2004) 0.02
    0.021579396 = product of:
      0.043158792 = sum of:
        0.043158792 = product of:
          0.086317584 = sum of:
            0.086317584 = weight(_text_:22 in 7196) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.086317584 = score(doc=7196,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15935703 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04550679 = 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
  8. Geißelmann, F.: Arbeitsergebnisse der Arbeitsgruppe Codes (2000) 0.02
    0.021579396 = product of:
      0.043158792 = sum of:
        0.043158792 = product of:
          0.086317584 = sum of:
            0.086317584 = weight(_text_:22 in 4973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.086317584 = score(doc=4973,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15935703 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04550679 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4973, 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=4973)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    26. 8.2000 19:22:35
  9. Weber, R.: "Functional requirements for bibliographic records" und Regelwerksentwicklung (2001) 0.02
    0.021579396 = product of:
      0.043158792 = sum of:
        0.043158792 = product of:
          0.086317584 = sum of:
            0.086317584 = weight(_text_:22 in 6838) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.086317584 = score(doc=6838,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15935703 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04550679 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6838, 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=6838)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Dialog mit Bibliotheken. 13(2001) H.3, S.20-22
  10. MARC and metadata : METS, MODS, and MARCXML: current and future implications part 2 (2004) 0.02
    0.021579396 = product of:
      0.043158792 = sum of:
        0.043158792 = product of:
          0.086317584 = sum of:
            0.086317584 = weight(_text_:22 in 2841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.086317584 = score(doc=2841,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15935703 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04550679 = 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
  11. Czeck, R.L.H.: Archival MARC records and finding aids in the context of end-user subject access to archival collections (1998) 0.02
    0.019294888 = product of:
      0.038589776 = sum of:
        0.038589776 = product of:
          0.07717955 = sum of:
            0.07717955 = weight(_text_:subject in 6464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07717955 = score(doc=6464,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04550679 = queryNorm
                0.4741941 = fieldWeight in 6464, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6464)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
  12. McBride, J.L.: Faceted subject access for music through USMARC : a case for linked fields (2000) 0.02
    0.019294888 = product of:
      0.038589776 = sum of:
        0.038589776 = product of:
          0.07717955 = sum of:
            0.07717955 = weight(_text_:subject in 5403) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07717955 = score(doc=5403,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04550679 = queryNorm
                0.4741941 = fieldWeight in 5403, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5403)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The USMARC Format for Bibliographic Description contains three fields (045, 047, and 048) designed to facilitate subject access to music materials. The fields cover three of the main aspects of subject description for music: date of composition, form or genre, and number of instruments or voices, respectively. The codes are rarely used for subject access, because of the difficulty of coding them and because false drops would result in retrieval of bibliographic records where more than one musical work is present, a situation that occurs frequently with sound recordings. It is proposed that the values of the fields be converted to natural language and that subfield 8 be used to link all access fields in a bibliographic record for greater precision in retrieval. This proposal has implications beyond music cataloging, especially for metadata and any bibliographic records describing materials containing many works and subjects.
  13. Byrne, D.J.: MARC manual : understanding and using MARC records (1998) 0.02
    0.018496625 = product of:
      0.03699325 = sum of:
        0.03699325 = product of:
          0.0739865 = sum of:
            0.0739865 = weight(_text_:22 in 6077) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0739865 = score(doc=6077,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15935703 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04550679 = queryNorm
                0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6077, 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=6077)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    2. 8.2001 16:22:33
  14. Duncan, D.: IFLA Core Programme for Universal Bibliographic Control and International MARC (UBCIM) and Division of Bibliographic Control reports on activities 1994-1995 : Section on Classification and Indexing (1996) 0.02
    0.018191395 = product of:
      0.03638279 = sum of:
        0.03638279 = product of:
          0.07276558 = sum of:
            0.07276558 = weight(_text_:subject in 4927) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07276558 = score(doc=4927,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04550679 = queryNorm
                0.4470745 = fieldWeight in 4927, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4927)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Discusses the work of the Section on Classification and Indexing, covering the working group on principles underlying subject heading languages; a state of the art survey of subject heading systems; requirements for a format for classification data; DDC edition 20; open programs at the Istanbul conference; the section newsletter; and cooperative projects
  15. International Seminar on the Creation and Use of Authority Files, St. Petersburg, Russia, 4-6 October 1995 (1996) 0.02
    0.018191395 = product of:
      0.03638279 = sum of:
        0.03638279 = product of:
          0.07276558 = sum of:
            0.07276558 = weight(_text_:subject in 6068) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07276558 = score(doc=6068,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04550679 = queryNorm
                0.4470745 = fieldWeight in 6068, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6068)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Content
    Papers of the following speakers: DANSKIN, A.: The Anglo-American Authority File: an idea whose time has come?; GUY, M.: The Bibliothèque Nationale de France and authority files: advances and perspectives in co-operation; KELM, B.: The Subject Authority File in Germany; McGARRY, D.: Guidelines for subject authority and reference entries; MURTOMAA, E.: Planning and creating name authority control: the Finnish experience
  16. Caplan, P.; Guenther, R.: Metadata for Internet resources : the Dublin Core Metadata Elements Set and its mapping to USMARC (1996) 0.02
    0.017438786 = product of:
      0.034877572 = sum of:
        0.034877572 = product of:
          0.069755144 = sum of:
            0.069755144 = weight(_text_:22 in 2408) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.069755144 = score(doc=2408,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.15935703 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04550679 = queryNorm
                0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 2408, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2408)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    13. 1.2007 18:31:22
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) nos.3/4, S.43-58
  17. Tennant, R.: ¬A bibliographic metadata infrastructure for the twenty-first century (2004) 0.02
    0.017438786 = product of:
      0.034877572 = sum of:
        0.034877572 = product of:
          0.069755144 = sum of:
            0.069755144 = weight(_text_:22 in 2845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.069755144 = score(doc=2845,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.15935703 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04550679 = queryNorm
                0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 2845, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2845)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    9.12.2005 19:22:38
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.175-181
  18. Bourdon, F.: Qu'est-ce qu'un format d'autorité? (1997) 0.02
    0.01591747 = product of:
      0.03183494 = sum of:
        0.03183494 = product of:
          0.06366988 = sum of:
            0.06366988 = weight(_text_:subject in 902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06366988 = score(doc=902,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.16275941 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04550679 = queryNorm
                0.3911902 = fieldWeight in 902, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=902)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Authority records complement bibliographic records, providing cataloguers with essential subject heading and related information. At present there is no international format standard comparable to ISBD for bibliographic records, though IFLA and the International Archives Council have set up working groups. The essential data form comprises of subject heading, structure, homonyms, with supplementary supporting information. In France MARC formats are most widely used, e.g. UNIMARC(A) for authority records and (B) for bibliographic. The National Library (BNF) is introducing new cataloguing software based on the reorganisation of its authotity files, using integrated INTERMARC. As an experiments, readers will for the first time have access to authority files, thus enriching, completing and clarifying the bibliographic records
  19. Paulus, W.; Weishaupt, K.: Bibliotheksdaten werden mehr wert : LibLink wertet bibliothekarische Dienstleistung auf (1996) 0.02
    0.015413855 = product of:
      0.03082771 = sum of:
        0.03082771 = product of:
          0.06165542 = sum of:
            0.06165542 = weight(_text_:22 in 5228) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06165542 = score(doc=5228,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15935703 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04550679 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5228, 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=5228)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    29. 9.1996 18:58:22
  20. Hoffmann, L.: ¬Die Globalisierung macht vor der Katalogisierung nicht Halt : Mit AACR2 zum Global Player? (2003) 0.02
    0.015413855 = product of:
      0.03082771 = sum of:
        0.03082771 = product of:
          0.06165542 = sum of:
            0.06165542 = weight(_text_:22 in 1544) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06165542 = score(doc=1544,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15935703 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04550679 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 1544, 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=1544)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 3.2016 12:15:46

Years

Languages

  • e 55
  • d 15
  • f 1
  • pl 1
  • sp 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 66
  • s 7
  • b 2
  • el 1
  • m 1
  • n 1
  • More… Less…