Search (7 results, page 1 of 1)

0.030540086 = product of:
  0.061080173 = sum of:
    0.061080173 = product of:
      0.122160345 = sum of:
        0.122160345 = weight(_text_:2003 in 2795) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.122160345 = score(doc=2795,freq=7.0), product of:
            0.19453894 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.339969 = idf(docFreq=1566, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044824958 = queryNorm
            0.62794805 = fieldWeight in 2795, product of:
              2.6457512 = tf(freq=7.0), with freq of:
                7.0 = termFreq=7.0
              4.339969 = idf(docFreq=1566, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2795)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

D-Lib magazine. 9(2003) no.4, x S

Year

2003

0.029498382 = product of:
  0.058996763 = sum of:
    0.058996763 = product of:
      0.117993526 = sum of:
        0.117993526 = weight(_text_:2003 in 2189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.117993526 = score(doc=2189,freq=5.0), product of:
            0.19453894 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.339969 = idf(docFreq=1566, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044824958 = queryNorm
            0.6065291 = fieldWeight in 2189, product of:
              2.236068 = tf(freq=5.0), with freq of:
                5.0 = termFreq=5.0
              4.339969 = idf(docFreq=1566, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2189)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

D-Lib magazine. 9(2003) no.9, x S

Year

2003

0.017451478 = product of:
  0.034902956 = sum of:
    0.034902956 = product of:
      0.06980591 = sum of:
        0.06980591 = weight(_text_:2003 in 1199) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06980591 = score(doc=1199,freq=7.0), product of:
            0.19453894 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.339969 = idf(docFreq=1566, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044824958 = queryNorm
            0.35882747 = fieldWeight in 1199, product of:
              2.6457512 = tf(freq=7.0), with freq of:
                7.0 = termFreq=7.0
              4.339969 = idf(docFreq=1566, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1199)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

On 18 November 2002, at a meeting organised by the CORES Project (Information Society Technologies Programme, European Union), several organisations regarded as maintenance authorities for metadata elements achieved consensus on a resolution to assign Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs) to metadata elements as a useful first step towards the development of mapping infrastructures and interoperability services. The signatories of the CORES Resolution agreed to promote this consensus in their communities and beyond and to implement an action plan in the following six months. Six months having passed, the maintainers of GILS, ONIX, MARC 21, CERIF, DOI, IEEE/LOM, and Dublin Core report on their implementations of the resolution and highlight issues of relevance to establishing good-practice conventions for declaring, identifying, and maintaining metadata elements more generally. In June 2003, the resolution was also endorsed by the maintainers of UNIMARC. The "Resolution on Metadata Element Identifiers", or CORES Resolution, is an agreement among the maintenance organisations for several major metadata standards - GILS, ONIX, MARC 21, UNIMARC, CERIF, DOI®, IEEE/LOM, and Dublin Core - to identify their metadata elements using Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs). The Uniform Resource Identifier, defined in the IETF RFC 2396 as "a compact string of characters for identifying an abstract or physical resource", has been promoted for use as a universal form of identification by the World Wide Web Consortium. The CORES Resolution, formulated at a meeting organised by the European project CORES in November 2002, included a commitment to publicise the consensus statement to a wider audience of metadata standards initiatives and to implement key points of the agreement within the following six months - specifically, to define URI assignment mechanisms, assign URIs to elements, and formulate policies for the persistence of those URIs. This article marks the passage of six months by reporting on progress made in implementing this common action plan. After presenting the text of the CORES Resolution and its three "clarifications", the article summarises the position of each signatory organisation towards assigning URIs to its metadata elements, noting any practical or strategic problems that may have emerged. These progress reports were based on input from Thomas Baker, José Borbinha, Eliot Christian, Erik Duval, Keith Jeffery, Rebecca Guenther, and Norman Paskin. The article closes with a few general observations about these first steps towards the clarification of shared conventions for the identification of metadata elements and perhaps, one can hope, towards the ultimate goal of improving interoperability among a diversity of metadata communities.

Source

D-Lib magazine. 9(2003) no.7/8, x S

Year

2003

0.01615693 = product of:
  0.03231386 = sum of:
    0.03231386 = product of:
      0.06462772 = sum of:
        0.06462772 = weight(_text_:2003 in 1192) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06462772 = score(doc=1192,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.19453894 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.339969 = idf(docFreq=1566, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044824958 = queryNorm
            0.3322097 = fieldWeight in 1192, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.339969 = idf(docFreq=1566, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1192)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In the June 2003 issue of D-Lib Magazine, Kenney et al. (2003) discuss a comparative study between Cornell's email reference staff and Google's Answers service. This interesting study provided insights on the potential impact of "computing and simple algorithms combined with human intelligence" for library reference services. As mentioned in the Kenney et al. article, Bill Arms (2000) had discussed the possibilities of automated digital libraries in an even earlier D-Lib article. Arms discusses not only automating reference services, but also another library function that seems to inspire lively debates about automation-metadata creation. While intended to illuminate, these debates sometimes generate more heat than light. In an effort to explore the potential for automating metadata generation, the Digital Knowledge Center (DKC) of the Sheridan Libraries at The Johns Hopkins University developed and tested an automated name authority control (ANAC) tool. ANAC represents a component of a digital workflow management system developed in connection with the digital Lester S. Levy Collection of Sheet Music. The evaluation of ANAC followed the spirit of the Kenney et al. study that was, as they stated, "more exploratory than scientific." These ANAC evaluation results are shared with the hope of fostering constructive dialogue and discussions about the potential for semi-automated techniques or frameworks for library functions and services such as metadata creation. The DKC's research agenda emphasizes the development of tools that combine automated processes and human intervention, with the overall goal of involving humans at higher levels of analysis and decision-making. Others have looked at issues regarding the automated generation of metadata. A session at the 2003 Joint Conference on Digital Libraries was devoted to automatic metadata creation, and a session at the 2004 conference addressed automated name disambiguation. Commercial vendors such as OCLC, Marcive, and LTI have long used automated techniques for matching names to Library of Congress authority records. We began developing ANAC as a component of a larger suite of open source tools to support workflow management for digital projects. This article describes the goals for the ANAC tool, provides an overview of the metadata records used for testing, describes the architecture for ANAC, and concludes with discussions of the methodology and evaluation of the experiment comparing human cataloging and ANAC-generated results.

0.009109745 = product of:
  0.01821949 = sum of:
    0.01821949 = product of:
      0.03643898 = sum of:
        0.03643898 = weight(_text_:22 in 266) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03643898 = score(doc=266,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15696937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044824958 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 266, 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=266)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 5.2021 12:43:05

0.007591454 = product of:
  0.015182908 = sum of:
    0.015182908 = product of:
      0.030365815 = sum of:
        0.030365815 = weight(_text_:22 in 4550) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030365815 = score(doc=4550,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15696937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044824958 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4550, 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=4550)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

10.11.2018 16:27:22

0.006073163 = product of:
  0.012146326 = sum of:
    0.012146326 = product of:
      0.024292652 = sum of:
        0.024292652 = weight(_text_:22 in 1236) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024292652 = score(doc=1236,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15696937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044824958 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1236, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1236)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

26.12.2011 14:01:22