Search (11 results, page 1 of 1)

0.044178404 = product of:
  0.1325352 = sum of:
    0.052265707 = weight(_text_:web in 731) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.052265707 = score(doc=731,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.14495286 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.36057037 = fieldWeight in 731, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=731)
    0.0802695 = weight(_text_:computer in 731) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0802695 = score(doc=731,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.16231956 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.4945153 = fieldWeight in 731, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=731)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

This book offers a comprehensive guide to the world of metadata, from its origins in the ancient cities of the Middle East, to the Semantic Web of today. The author takes us on a journey through the centuries-old history of metadata up to the modern world of crowdsourcing and Google, showing how metadata works and what it is made of. The author explores how it has been used ideologically and how it can never be objective. He argues how central it is to human cultures and the way they develop. Metadata: Shaping Knowledge from Antiquity to the Semantic Web is for all readers with an interest in how we humans organize our knowledge and why this is important. It is suitable for those new to the subject as well as those know its basics. It also makes an excellent introduction for students of information science and librarianship.

LCSH

Computer science
Computer applications in arts and humanities
Popular computer science

Subject

Computer science
Computer applications in arts and humanities
Popular computer science

Theme

Semantic Web

0.042185646 = product of:
  0.12655693 = sum of:
    0.06812209 = weight(_text_:wide in 115) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06812209 = score(doc=115,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19679762 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.34615302 = fieldWeight in 115, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=115)
    0.05843484 = weight(_text_:web in 115) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05843484 = score(doc=115,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.14495286 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.40312994 = fieldWeight in 115, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=115)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

Bibliografische Daten, Normdaten und Metadaten im Semantic Web - Konzepte der Bibliografischen Kontrolle im Wandel. Der Titel dieser Arbeit zielt in ein essentielles Feld der Bibliotheks- und Informationswissenschaft, die Bibliografische Kontrolle. Als zweites zentrales Konzept wird der in der Weiterentwicklung des World Wide Webs (WWW) bedeutsame Begriff des Semantic Webs genannt. Auf den ersten Blick handelt es sich hier um einen ungleichen Wettstreit. Auf der einen Seite die Bibliografische Kontrolle, welche die Methoden und Mittel zur Erschließung von bibliothekarischen Objekten umfasst und traditionell in Form von formal-inhaltlichen Surrogaten in Katalogen daherkommt. Auf der anderen Seite das Buzzword Semantic Web mit seinen hochtrabenden Konnotationen eines durch Selbstreferenzialität "bedeutungstragenden", wenn nicht sogar "intelligenten" Webs. Wie kamen also eine wissenschaftliche Bibliothekarin und ein Mitglied des World Wide Web Consortiums 2007 dazu, gemeinsam einen Aufsatz zu publizieren und darin zu behaupten, das semantische Netz würde ein "bibliothekarischeres" Netz sein? Um sich dieser Frage zu nähern, soll zunächst kurz die historische Entwicklung der beiden Informationssphären Bibliothek und WWW gemeinsam betrachtet werden. Denn so oft - und völlig zurecht - die informationelle Revolution durch das Internet beschworen wird, so taucht auch immer wieder das Analogon einer weltweiten, virtuellen Bibliothek auf. Genauer gesagt, nahmen die theoretischen Überlegungen, die später zur Entwicklung des Internets führen sollten, ihren Ausgangspunkt (neben Kybernetik und entstehender Computertechnik) beim Konzept des Informationsspeichers Bibliothek.

Theme

Semantic Web

0.019216085 = product of:
  0.057648253 = sum of:
    0.036585998 = weight(_text_:web in 2606) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.036585998 = score(doc=2606,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14495286 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.25239927 = fieldWeight in 2606, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2606)
    0.021062255 = product of:
      0.04212451 = sum of:
        0.04212451 = weight(_text_:22 in 2606) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04212451 = score(doc=2606,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1555381 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044416238 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2606, 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=2606)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

Catalogers have become fluent in information technology such as web design skills, HyperText Markup Language (HTML), Cascading Stylesheets (CSS), eXensible Markup Language (XML), and programming languages. The knowledge gained from learning information technology can be used to experiment with methods of transforming one metadata schema into another using various software solutions. This paper will discuss the use of eXtensible Stylesheet Language Transformations (XSLT) for repurposing, editing, and reformatting metadata. Catalogers have the requisite skills for working with any metadata schema, and if they are excluded from metadata work, libraries are wasting a valuable human resource.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.009633917 = product of:
  0.057803504 = sum of:
    0.057803504 = weight(_text_:wide in 4163) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.057803504 = score(doc=4163,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19679762 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.29372054 = fieldWeight in 4163, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4163)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

This article evaluates practices on metadata quality control in digital repositories and collections using an online survey of cataloging and metadata professionals in the United States. The study examines (1) the perceived importance of metadata quality, (2) metadata quality evaluation criteria and issues, and (3) mechanisms for building quality assurance into the metadata creation process. The survey finds wide recognition of the essential role of metadata quality assurance. Accuracy and consistency are prioritized as the main criteria for metadata quality evaluation. Metadata semantics greatly affects consistent and accurate metadata application. Strong awareness of metadata quality correlates with the widespread adoption of various quality control mechanisms, such as staff training, manual review, metadata guidelines, and metadata generation tools. And yet, metadata guidelines are used less frequently as a quality assurance mechanism in digital collections involving multiple institutions.

0.008710952 = product of:
  0.052265707 = sum of:
    0.052265707 = weight(_text_:web in 2086) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.052265707 = score(doc=2086,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.14495286 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.36057037 = fieldWeight in 2086, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2086)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

An overview of the field of information organization that examines resource description as both a product and process of the contemporary digital environment. This timely book employs the unifying mechanism of the semantic web and the resource description framework to integrate the various traditions and practices of information and knowledge organization. Uniquely, it covers both the domain-specific traditions and practices and the practices of the 'metadata movement' through a single lens - that of resource description in the broadest, semantic web sense. This approach more readily accommodates coverage of the new Resource Description and Access (RDA) standard, which aims to move library cataloguing into the centre of the semantic web. The work surrounding RDA looks set to revolutionise the field of information organization, and this book will bring both the standard and its model and concepts into focus.

Content

Information resource attributes - metadata for information retrieval - metadata sources and quality - economics and management of metadata - knowledge organization systems - the semantic web - books and e-books, websites and audiovisual resources - business and government documents - learning resources - the field of information/knowledge organization.

0.0065539777 = product of:
  0.039323866 = sum of:
    0.039323866 = weight(_text_:computer in 1574) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.039323866 = score(doc=1574,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16231956 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.24226204 = fieldWeight in 1574, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1574)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Series

Communications in computer and information science; 478

0.0065539777 = product of:
  0.039323866 = sum of:
    0.039323866 = weight(_text_:computer in 1589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.039323866 = score(doc=1589,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16231956 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.24226204 = fieldWeight in 1589, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1589)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Series

Communications in computer and information science; 478

0.0060976665 = product of:
  0.036585998 = sum of:
    0.036585998 = weight(_text_:web in 5140) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.036585998 = score(doc=5140,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14495286 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.25239927 = fieldWeight in 5140, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5140)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

French law on digital legal deposit covers websites and online content as well as ebooks. It imposes no obligation to produce a bibliography, indexing being sufficient. But despite their innovative characteristics, ebooks are still books, and their metadata is closer to that of printed materials than to the web indexing. To set up an ebook deposit workflow, the BnF benefits from its experience with digital documents and its tradition of legal deposit. This is to present the questions that it faces when dealing with the cataloging of ebooks and the management of their metadata, and the solutions that are emerging.

0.0052265706 = product of:
  0.031359423 = sum of:
    0.031359423 = weight(_text_:web in 2883) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031359423 = score(doc=2883,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14495286 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 2883, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2883)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Cataloging and metadata operations in academic libraries are focusing on original cataloging of their unique and hidden collections that have not been available to users because of a lack of metadata. However, creating MARC format metadata is an expensive process; libraries need professional catalogers with appropriate experience and knowledge or must train staff to do the work. To improve the cataloging and metadata creation workflow, the University of Illinois at Urbana- Champaign Library developed a web application, Metadata Maker, which allows anyone to create metadata in four different formats, including MARC21 for an online public access catalog, regardless of their familiarity with metadata standards or systems that utilize the metadata. Released as an open source application, Metadata Maker supports diacritics and Unicode non-Roman language encoding, and creates metadata records that ensure discovery and access of unique library collections.

0.0052265706 = product of:
  0.031359423 = sum of:
    0.031359423 = weight(_text_:web in 3523) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031359423 = score(doc=3523,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14495286 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 3523, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3523)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

On December 12, 2016, Carl Stahmer and MacKenzie Smith presented at the CNI Members Fall Meeting about the BIBFLOW project, self-described on Twitter as "a two-year project of the UC Davis University Library and Zepheira investigating the future of library technical services." In her opening remarks, Ms. Smith, University Librarian at UC Davis, stated that one of the goals of the project was to devise a roadmap "to get from where we are today, which is kind of the 1970s with a little lipstick on it, to 2020, which is where we're going to be very soon." The notion that where libraries are today is somehow behind the times is one of the commonly heard rationales behind a move to linked data. Stated more precisely: - Libraries devote considerable time and resources to producing high-quality bibliographic metadata - This metadata is stored in unconnected silos - This metadata is in a format (MARC) that is incompatible with technologies of the emerging Semantic Web - The visibility of library metadata is diminished as a result of the two points above Are these assertions true? If yes, is linked data the solution?

0.0030088935 = product of:
  0.01805336 = sum of:
    0.01805336 = product of:
      0.03610672 = sum of:
        0.03610672 = weight(_text_:22 in 2595) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03610672 = score(doc=2595,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1555381 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044416238 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2595, 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=2595)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22