Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

0.0138591435 = product of:
  0.027718287 = sum of:
    0.027718287 = product of:
      0.055436574 = sum of:
        0.055436574 = weight(_text_:management in 3274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.055436574 = score(doc=3274,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17543502 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05204841 = queryNorm
            0.31599492 = fieldWeight in 3274, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3274)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

LCSH

Database management

Subject

Database management

0.012340722 = product of:
  0.024681443 = sum of:
    0.024681443 = product of:
      0.049362887 = sum of:
        0.049362887 = weight(_text_:22 in 3283) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.049362887 = score(doc=3283,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18226467 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05204841 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3283, 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=3283)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.011549287 = product of:
  0.023098573 = sum of:
    0.023098573 = product of:
      0.046197146 = sum of:
        0.046197146 = weight(_text_:management in 2192) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046197146 = score(doc=2192,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17543502 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05204841 = queryNorm
            0.2633291 = fieldWeight in 2192, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2192)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

LCSH

Database management

Subject

Database management

0.009239429 = product of:
  0.018478857 = sum of:
    0.018478857 = product of:
      0.036957715 = sum of:
        0.036957715 = weight(_text_:management in 3965) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.036957715 = score(doc=3965,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17543502 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05204841 = queryNorm
            0.21066327 = fieldWeight in 3965, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3965)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The paper discusses the importance of these initiatives in releasing as linked data the very large quantities of rich, professionally-generated metadata stored in formats based on these standards, such as UNIMARC and MARC21, addressing such issues as critical mass for semantic and statistical inferencing, integration with user- and machine-generated metadata, and authenticity, veracity and trust. The paper also discusses related initiatives to release controlled vocabularies, including the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), ISBD, Library of Congress Name Authority File (LCNAF), Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH), Rameau (French subject headings), Universal Decimal Classification (UDC), and the Virtual International Authority File (VIAF) as linked data. Finally, the paper discusses the potential collective impact of these initiatives on metadata workflows and management systems.

Content

Vortrag im Rahmen der Session 93. Cataloguing der WORLD LIBRARY AND INFORMATION CONGRESS: 76TH IFLA GENERAL CONFERENCE AND ASSEMBLY, 10-15 August 2010, Gothenburg, Sweden - 149. Information Technology, Cataloguing, Classification and Indexing with Knowledge Management

0.006533263 = product of:
  0.013066526 = sum of:
    0.013066526 = product of:
      0.026133051 = sum of:
        0.026133051 = weight(_text_:management in 4200) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026133051 = score(doc=4200,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17543502 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05204841 = queryNorm
            0.14896142 = fieldWeight in 4200, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4200)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to examine the current state of Linked Data (LD) in archival moving image description, and propose ways in which current metadata records can be enriched and enhanced by interlinking such metadata with relevant information found in other data sets. Design/methodology/approach Several possible metadata models for moving image production and archiving are considered, including models from records management, digital curation, and the recent BIBFRAME AV Modeling Study. This research also explores how mappings between archival moving image records and relevant external data sources might be drawn, and what gaps exist between current vocabularies and what is needed to record and make accessible the full lifecycle of archiving through production, use, and reuse. Findings The author notes several major impediments to implementation of LD for archival moving images. The various pieces of information about creators, places, and events found in moving image records are not easily connected to relevant information in other sources because they are often not semantically defined within the record and can be hidden in unstructured fields. Libraries, archives, and museums must work on aligning the various vocabularies and schemas of potential value for archival moving image description to enable interlinking between vocabularies currently in use and those which are used by external data sets. Alignment of vocabularies is often complicated by mismatches in granularity between vocabularies. Research limitations/implications The focus is on how these models inform functional requirements for access and other archival activities, and how the field might benefit from having a common metadata model for critical archival descriptive activities. Practical implications By having a shared model, archivists may more easily align current vocabularies and develop new vocabularies and schemas to address the needs of moving image data creators and scholars. Originality/value Moving image archives, like other cultural institutions with significant heritage holdings, can benefit tremendously from investing in the semantic definition of information found in their information databases. While commercial entities such as search engines and data providers have already embraced the opportunities that semantic search provides for resource discovery, most non-commercial entities are just beginning to do so. Thus, this research addresses the benefits and challenges of enriching and enhancing archival moving image records with semantically defined information via LD.