-
Kleeck, D. Van; Nakano, H.; Langford, G.; Shelton, T.; Lundgren, J.; O'Dell, A.J.: Managing bibliographic data quality for electronic resources (2017)
0.02
0.02075909 = product of:
0.09687576 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 5160) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=5160,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 5160, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5160)
0.04977173 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5160) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04977173 = score(doc=5160,freq=4.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.4258017 = fieldWeight in 5160, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5160)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 5160) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=5160,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 5160, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5160)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- This article presents a case study of quality management issues for electronic resource metadata to assess the support of user tasks (find, select, and obtain library resources) and potential for increased efficiencies in acquisitions and cataloging workflows. The authors evaluated the quality of existing bibliographic records (mostly vendor supplied) for e-resource collections as compared with records for the same collections in OCLC's WorldShare Collection Manager (WCM). Findings are that WCM records better support user tasks by containing more summaries and tables of contents; other checkpoints are largely comparable between the two source record groups. The transition to WCM records is discussed.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 55(2017) no.7/8, S.560-577
-
Lopatin, L.: Metadata practices in academic and non-academic libraries for digital projects : a survey (2010)
0.01
0.014758593 = product of:
0.068873435 = sum of:
0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 4165) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02018744 = score(doc=4165,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 4165, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4165)
0.02849856 = product of:
0.05699712 = sum of:
0.05699712 = weight(_text_:schemes in 4165) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05699712 = score(doc=4165,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16067243 = queryWeight, product of:
5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.35474116 = fieldWeight in 4165, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4165)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 4165) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02018744 = score(doc=4165,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 4165, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4165)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- This article presents the results of a survey examining and comparing the metadata practices of academic and non-academic libraries regarding digital projects. It explores the types of metadata and vocabularies utilized, issues of interoperability, end-user-created metadata, and staffing for metadata planning and creation. Participants from 87 academic libraries and 40 non-academic libraries responded to the survey. The survey found that, despite their different environments, academic and non-academic libraries engage in similar metadata practices. The majority of the participating libraries have metadata librarians, who are the primary staff members responsible for all metadata activities. Academic libraries tend to use more metadata schemes, plan for metadata interoperability more frequently, and are more likely to have created new positions responsible for metadata for digital projects.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 48(2010) no.8, S.716-742
-
Leong, J.H.-t.: ¬The convergence of metadata and bibliographic control? : trends and patterns in addressing the current issues and challenges of providing subject access (2010)
0.01
0.0147388885 = product of:
0.10317221 = sum of:
0.05092278 = weight(_text_:subject in 3355) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05092278 = score(doc=3355,freq=8.0), product of:
0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.4741941 = fieldWeight in 3355, 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=3355)
0.05224943 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 3355) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05224943 = score(doc=3355,freq=6.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.44699866 = fieldWeight in 3355, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3355)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- Resource description and discovery have been facilitated generally in two approaches, namely bibliographic control and metadata, which now may converge in response to current issues and challenges of providing subject access. Four categories of major issues and challenges in the provision of subject access to digital and non-digital resources are: 1) the advancement of new knowledge; 2) the fall of controlled vocabulary and the rise of natural language; 3) digitizing and networking the traditional catalogue systems; and 4) electronic publishing and the Internet. The creation of new knowledge and the debate about the use of natural language and controlled vocabulary as subject headings becomes even more intense in the digital and online environment. The third and fourth categories are conceived after the emergence of networked environments and the rapid expansion of electronic resources. Recognizing the convergence of metadata schemas and bibliographic control calls for adapting to the new environment by developing tools that exploit the strengths of both.
-
Tosaka, Y.; Park, J.-r.: RDA: Resource description & access : a survey of the current state of the art (2013)
0.01
0.008109867 = product of:
0.05676906 = sum of:
0.021217827 = weight(_text_:subject in 677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021217827 = score(doc=677,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.19758089 = fieldWeight in 677, 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=677)
0.035551235 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035551235 = score(doc=677,freq=4.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.30414405 = fieldWeight in 677, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=677)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- Resource Description & Access (RDA) is intended to provide a flexible and extensible framework that can accommodate all types of content and media within rapidly evolving digital environments while also maintaining compatibility with the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules, 2nd edition (AACR2). The cataloging community is grappling with practical issues in navigating the transition from AACR2 to RDA; there is a definite need to evaluate major subject areas and broader themes in information organization under the new RDA paradigm. This article aims to accomplish this task through a thorough and critical review of the emerging RDA literature published from 2005 to 2011. The review mostly concerns key areas of difference between RDA and AACR2, the relationship of the new cataloging code to metadata standards, the impact on encoding standards such as Machine-Readable Cataloging (MARC), end user considerations, and practitioners' views on RDA implementation and training. Future research will require more in-depth studies of RDA's expected benefits and the manner in which the new cataloging code will improve resource retrieval and bibliographic control for users and catalogers alike over AACR2. The question as to how the cataloging community can best move forward to the post-AACR2/MARC environment must be addressed carefully so as to chart the future of bibliographic control in the evolving environment of information production, management, and use.
-
DeZelar-Tiedman, C.: Exploring user-contributed metadata's potential to enhance access to literary works (2011)
0.01
0.008043489 = product of:
0.056304425 = sum of:
0.044100422 = weight(_text_:subject in 2595) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.044100422 = score(doc=2595,freq=6.0), product of:
0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.41066417 = fieldWeight in 2595, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2595)
0.0122040035 = product of:
0.024408007 = sum of:
0.024408007 = weight(_text_:22 in 2595) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024408007 = score(doc=2595,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = 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)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- Academic libraries have moved toward providing social networking features, such as tagging, in their library catalogs. To explore whether user tags can enhance access to individual literary works, the author obtained a sample of individual works of English and American literature from the twentieth and twenty-first centuries from a large academic library catalog and searched them in LibraryThing. The author compared match rates, the availability of subject headings and tags across various literary forms, and the terminology used in tags versus controlled-vocabulary headings on a subset of records. In addition, she evaluated the usefulness of available LibraryThing tags for the library catalog records that lacked subject headings. Options for utilizing the subject terms available in sources outside the local catalog also are discussed.
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
-
Taniguchi, S.: Understanding RDA as a DC application profile (2013)
0.01
0.007690453 = product of:
0.053833168 = sum of:
0.026916584 = weight(_text_:classification in 1906) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026916584 = score(doc=1906,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 1906, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1906)
0.026916584 = weight(_text_:classification in 1906) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026916584 = score(doc=1906,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 1906, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1906)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 51(2013) no.6, S.601-623
-
Valentino, M.L.: Integrating metadata creation into catalog workflow (2010)
0.01
0.0067291465 = product of:
0.047104023 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 4160) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=4160,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 4160, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4160)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 4160) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=4160,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 4160, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4160)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 48(2010) nos.6/7, S.541-550
-
Pope, J.T.; Holley, R.P.: Google Book Search and metadata (2011)
0.01
0.0067291465 = product of:
0.047104023 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1887) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1887,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1887, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1887)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1887) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1887,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1887, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1887)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 49(2011) no.1, S.1-13
-
Derrot, S.; Koskas, M.: My fair metadata : cataloging legal deposit Ebooks at the National Library of France (2016)
0.01
0.0067291465 = product of:
0.047104023 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 5140) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=5140,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 5140, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5140)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 5140) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=5140,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 5140, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5140)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 54(2016) no.8, S.583-592
-
Park, J.-R.; Tosaka, Y.: Metadata quality control in digital repositories and collections : criteria, semantics, and mechanisms (2010)
0.01
0.00576784 = product of:
0.04037488 = sum of:
0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 4163) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02018744 = score(doc=4163,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 4163, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4163)
0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 4163) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02018744 = score(doc=4163,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 4163, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4163)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 48(2010) no.8, S.696-715
-
Farneth, D.: How can we achieve GLAM? : Understanding and overcoming the challenges to integrating metadata across museums, archives, and libraries: Part 2 (2016)
0.01
0.00576784 = product of:
0.04037488 = sum of:
0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 5130) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02018744 = score(doc=5130,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 5130, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5130)
0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 5130) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02018744 = score(doc=5130,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 5130, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5130)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 54(2016) no.5/6, S.292-304
-
Tallerås, C.; Dahl, J.H.B.; Pharo, N.: User conceptualizations of derivative relationships in the bibliographic universe (2018)
0.00
0.004750734 = product of:
0.066510275 = sum of:
0.066510275 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 4247) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.066510275 = score(doc=4247,freq=14.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.56900144 = fieldWeight in 4247, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4247)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Abstract
- Purpose Considerable effort is devoted to developing new models for organizing bibliographic metadata. However, such models have been repeatedly criticized for their lack of proper user testing. The purpose of this paper is to present a study on how non-experts in bibliographic systems map the bibliographic universe and, in particular, how they conceptualize relationships between independent but strongly related entities. Design/methodology/approach The study is based on an open concept-mapping task performed to externalize the conceptualizations of 98 novice students. The conceptualizations of the resulting concept maps are identified and analyzed statistically. Findings The study shows that the participants' conceptualizations have great variety, differing in detail and granularity. These conceptualizations can be categorized into two main groups according to derivative relationships: those that apply a single-entity model directly relating document entities and those (the majority) that apply a multi-entity model relating documents through a high-level collocating node. These high-level nodes seem to be most adequately interpreted either as superwork devices collocating documents belonging to the same bibliographic family or as devices collocating documents belonging to a shared fictional world. Originality/value The findings can guide the work to develop bibliographic standards. Based on the diversity of the conceptualizations, the findings also emphasize the need for more user testing of both conceptual models and the bibliographic end-user systems implementing those models.
-
Zapounidou, S.; Sfakakis, M.; Papatheodorou, C.: Library data integration : towards BIBFRAME mapping to EDM (2014)
0.00
0.0021547303 = product of:
0.030166224 = sum of:
0.030166224 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030166224 = score(doc=1589,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.2580748 = fieldWeight in 1589, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1589)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Abstract
- Integration of library data into the Linked Data environment is a key issue in libraries and is approached on the basis of interoperability between library data conceptual models. Achieving interoperability for different representations of the same or related entities between the library and cultural heritage domains shall enhance rich bibliographic data reusability and support the development of new data-driven information services. This paper aims to contribute to the desired interoperability by attempting to map core semantic paths between the BIBFRAME and EDM conceptual models. BIBFRAME is developed by the Library of Congress to support transformation of legacy library data in MARC format into linked data. EDM is the model developed for and used in the Europeana Cultural Heritage aggregation portal.
-
Edmunds, J.: Roadmap to nowhere : BIBFLOW, BIBFRAME, and linked data for libraries (2017)
0.00
0.0021547303 = product of:
0.030166224 = sum of:
0.030166224 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 3523) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030166224 = score(doc=3523,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.2580748 = fieldWeight in 3523, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3523)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- 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?
-
Gartner, R.: Metadata : shaping knowledge from antiquity to the semantic web (2016)
0.00
0.0015155592 = product of:
0.021217827 = sum of:
0.021217827 = weight(_text_:subject in 731) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021217827 = score(doc=731,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.19758089 = fieldWeight in 731, 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=731)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- 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.
-
Ilik, V.; Storlien, J.; Olivarez, J.: Metadata makeover (2014)
0.00
0.0010170004 = product of:
0.014238005 = sum of:
0.014238005 = product of:
0.02847601 = sum of:
0.02847601 = weight(_text_:22 in 2606) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02847601 = score(doc=2606,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = 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)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
