Search (182 results, page 2 of 10)

0.077694096 = product of:
  0.15538819 = sum of:
    0.11560067 = weight(_text_:digital in 1497) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11560067 = score(doc=1497,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.58470786 = fieldWeight in 1497, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1497)
    0.039787523 = weight(_text_:library in 1497) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.039787523 = score(doc=1497,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.30190483 = fieldWeight in 1497, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1497)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

This paper discusses the use of OCLC's Connexion service (formerly CORC) by the Centre for Digital Library Research at the University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland. The Centre has completed, and is currently engaged in, a number of research projects involving the application of Dublin Core and MARC21 in creating metadata for digital resources; these include projects an the Glasgow Digital Library, East Dunbartonshire local history, and a pilot Scottish Cultural Portal.The Connexion service provides a MARC21-DC converter, and the Centre has been investigating its incorporation in workflows for creating and maintaining digital libraries. This has included the use of databases to store metadata, with subsequent output to Dublin Core and conversion to MARC21.

0.07466953 = product of:
  0.14933906 = sum of:
    0.10339639 = weight(_text_:digital in 499) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10339639 = score(doc=499,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.52297866 = fieldWeight in 499, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=499)
    0.045942668 = weight(_text_:library in 499) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045942668 = score(doc=499,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.34860963 = fieldWeight in 499, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=499)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Source

Digital Library: challenges and solutions for the new millennium. Proceedings on an International Conference held in Bologna, Italy, June 1999. Ed. by P. Connolly and D. Reidy

0.07371451 = product of:
  0.14742902 = sum of:
    0.120629124 = weight(_text_:digital in 1250) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.120629124 = score(doc=1250,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.61014175 = fieldWeight in 1250, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1250)
    0.026799891 = weight(_text_:library in 1250) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026799891 = score(doc=1250,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.20335563 = fieldWeight in 1250, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1250)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Metadata has taken an a new took with the advent of XML and digital resources. XML provides a new versatile structure for tagging and packaging metadata as the rapid proliferation of digital resources demands both rapidly produced descriptive data and the encoding of more types of metadata. Two emerging standards are attempting to harness these developments for library needs. The first is the Metadata Object and Description Schema (MODS), a MARC-compatible XML schema for encoding descriptive data. The second standard is the Metadata Encoding and Transmission Standard (METS), a highly flexible XML schema for packaging the descriptive metadata and various other important types of metadata needed to assure the use and preservation of digital resources.

0.07290597 = product of:
  0.14581195 = sum of:
    0.0895439 = weight(_text_:digital in 2518) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0895439 = score(doc=2518,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.4529128 = fieldWeight in 2518, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2518)
    0.05626805 = weight(_text_:library in 2518) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05626805 = score(doc=2518,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.42695788 = fieldWeight in 2518, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2518)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

This paper introduces the Just-in-Time Teaching (JiTT) digital library and describes the pedagogical nature of the resources that make up this library for educators. Because resources in this library are stored in the form of metadata records, the utility of the metadata scheme, its elements and its relationships is central to the ability of the library to address the pedagogical needs of instructors in the work domain of the classroom. The analytic framework provided by cognitive work analysis (CWA) is proposed as an innovative approach for evaluating the effectiveness of the JiTT metadata scheme. CWA is also discussed as an approach to assessing the ability of this extensive networked library to create a common digital environment that fosters cooperation and collaboration among instructors.

0.072070494 = product of:
  0.14414099 = sum of:
    0.10339639 = weight(_text_:digital in 6048) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10339639 = score(doc=6048,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.52297866 = fieldWeight in 6048, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6048)
    0.0407446 = product of:
      0.0814892 = sum of:
        0.0814892 = weight(_text_:22 in 6048) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0814892 = score(doc=6048,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6048, 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=6048)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Date

22. 9.2007 15:41:14

0.07128137 = product of:
  0.095041834 = sum of:
    0.051698197 = weight(_text_:digital in 2636) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.051698197 = score(doc=2636,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.26148933 = fieldWeight in 2636, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2636)
    0.022971334 = weight(_text_:library in 2636) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022971334 = score(doc=2636,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.17430481 = fieldWeight in 2636, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2636)
    0.0203723 = product of:
      0.0407446 = sum of:
        0.0407446 = weight(_text_:22 in 2636) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0407446 = score(doc=2636,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2636, 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=2636)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)

Abstract

This paper describes metadata development of an application profile for the National Science Digital Library (NSDL) Achievement Standards Network (ASN) in the United States. The ASN is a national repository of machine-readable achievement standards modeled in RDF that shape teaching and learning in the various states. We describe the nature of the ASN metadata and the various uses to which that metadata is applied including the alignment of the standards of one state to those of another and the correlation of those standards to educational resources in support of resource discovery and retrieval.

Source

Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas

0.07118432 = product of:
  0.14236864 = sum of:
    0.10446788 = weight(_text_:digital in 1228) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10446788 = score(doc=1228,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.5283983 = fieldWeight in 1228, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1228)
    0.03790077 = weight(_text_:library in 1228) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03790077 = score(doc=1228,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.28758827 = fieldWeight in 1228, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1228)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Interoperability between digital libraries depends on effective sharing of metadata. Successful sharing of metadata requires common standards for metadata exchange. Previous efforts have focused on either defining a single metadata standard, such as Dublin Core, or building digital library middleware, such as Z39.50 or Stanford's Digital Library Interoperability Protocol. In this article, we propose a distributed architecture for managing metadata and metadata schema. Instead of normalizing all metadata and schema to a single format, we have focused on building a middleware framework that tolerates heterogeneity. By providing facilities for typing and dynamic conversion of metadata, our system permits continual introduction of new forms of metadata with minimal impact on compatibility.

0.06794138 = product of:
  0.13588277 = sum of:
    0.10339639 = weight(_text_:digital in 4766) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10339639 = score(doc=4766,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.52297866 = fieldWeight in 4766, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4766)
    0.032486375 = weight(_text_:library in 4766) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032486375 = score(doc=4766,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.24650425 = fieldWeight in 4766, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4766)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

The tradition of union catalogs and similar broad-based, comprehensive bibliographic utilities and tools is one of long standing in the discipline of librarianship. As we move towards greater reliance on digital primary sources, the sharing of information about what we hold in our digital collections intuitively seems of increasing import and value as a way to organize and manage the explosion of online information resources. The Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting enables effective and efficient sharing of digital metadata and is being utilized across a wide spectrum of disciplines and digital library projects. Experience to date gives reason for optimism and provides evidence and confirmation that, even as the technologies we use evolve, the intellectual framework of our tradition persists and continues to be relevant.

Source

Library hi tech. 21(2003) no.2, S.115-117

0.06649769 = product of:
  0.13299538 = sum of:
    0.10339639 = weight(_text_:digital in 783) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10339639 = score(doc=783,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.52297866 = fieldWeight in 783, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=783)
    0.029598987 = product of:
      0.059197973 = sum of:
        0.059197973 = weight(_text_:project in 783) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.059197973 = score(doc=783,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.27981415 = fieldWeight in 783, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=783)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

The complexity of cataloging manuscripts, particularly medieval manuscripts, has meant that these materials have remained largely inaccessible to the public. The quantity and quality of the descriptive data, the time and money it takes to catalog manuscripts, and the fragility of the materials themselves explain the dearth of searchable data on these valuable resources. Even when manuscripts have been cataloged, they have often been physically available only to a few elite scholars who are able to gain access to them. Certain institutions have embarked on projects to reverse this situation. This paper deals with three of these projects: the British Library's Digital Catalogue of Illuminated Manuscripts (DigCIM), a European consortium's database entitled Manuscripts And Letters Via Integrated Networks in Europe (MALVINE), and Columbia University's Digital Scriptorium (DS). The author explores the history of each project, compares the metadata utilized by each one through the creation of a crosswalk, and analyzes the usefulness of these catalogs to the user.

Object

Digital Scriptorium

0.06405575 = product of:
  0.1281115 = sum of:
    0.097483054 = weight(_text_:digital in 1248) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.097483054 = score(doc=1248,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.493069 = fieldWeight in 1248, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1248)
    0.030628446 = weight(_text_:library in 1248) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030628446 = score(doc=1248,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 1248, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1248)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Content

Einleitung zu den Beiträgen: GUENTHER, R. et al.: New metadata standards for digital resources: MODS and METS; GREENBERG, J.: Metadata generation: processes, people and tools; TENNIS, J.T.: Data collection for controlled vocabulary interoperability: Dublin Core audience element; JUN, W.: A knowledge network constructed by integrating classification, thesaurs and metadata in a digital library

0.06405575 = product of:
  0.1281115 = sum of:
    0.097483054 = weight(_text_:digital in 1262) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.097483054 = score(doc=1262,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.493069 = fieldWeight in 1262, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1262)
    0.030628446 = weight(_text_:library in 1262) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030628446 = score(doc=1262,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 1262, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1262)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Long-needed guide for anyone involved in the preservation of digital information and a "must for librarians, archiving professionals, faculty and students of library science, administrators and corporate leaders". Comprehensive literature review. The author has clearly been extremely thorough in tracking down an exhaustive record of the literature. This is then paraphrased and synthesized, but not critically

0.06318387 = product of:
  0.12636773 = sum of:
    0.10339639 = weight(_text_:digital in 4353) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10339639 = score(doc=4353,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.52297866 = fieldWeight in 4353, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4353)
    0.022971334 = weight(_text_:library in 4353) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022971334 = score(doc=4353,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.17430481 = fieldWeight in 4353, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4353)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

A key component for the successful preservation of digital resources is going to be the metadata that enables automated preservation processes to take place. The number of digital items will preclude human handling and the fact that these resources are electronic makes them logical for computer driven preservation activities. Over the last decade there have been a number of digital repository experiments that took different approaches, developed and used different data models, and generally moved our understanding forward. This paper reports on a recent initiative, PREMIS, that builds upon concepts and experience to date. It merits careful testing to see if the metadata identified can be used generally and become a foundation for more detailed metadata. And how much more will be needed for preservation activities? Initiatives for additional technical metadata and document format registries are also discussed.

Footnote

Vortrag, World Library and Information Congress: 71th IFLA General Conference and Council "Libraries - A voyage of discovery", August 14th - 18th 2005, Oslo, Norway.

0.06318387 = product of:
  0.12636773 = sum of:
    0.10339639 = weight(_text_:digital in 689) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10339639 = score(doc=689,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.52297866 = fieldWeight in 689, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=689)
    0.022971334 = weight(_text_:library in 689) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022971334 = score(doc=689,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.17430481 = fieldWeight in 689, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=689)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

This review is a summary of the state-of-the-art for those who have not been intimately dealing with the evolution of digital archives. At the same time this survey will be a useful resource and starting point for archivists, librarians and technicians, who are becoming involved in institutional digitization projects. It presents a brief overview of what is meant by a digital library and a digital archive, and how archival collections can be described. It expresses briefly the different approaches to collections and their descriptions and suggests that a consistent approach to descriptions at collection and item level is an important factor in initiatives which seek to provide integrated access to distributed resources, whether those resources are traditional or digital.

0.06318387 = product of:
  0.12636773 = sum of:
    0.10339639 = weight(_text_:digital in 4697) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10339639 = score(doc=4697,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.52297866 = fieldWeight in 4697, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4697)
    0.022971334 = weight(_text_:library in 4697) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022971334 = score(doc=4697,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.17430481 = fieldWeight in 4697, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4697)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

The range of metadata activity over this last decade is both extensive and astonishing, and substantiates metadata as an integral part of our digital information infrastructure. This entry begins with a brief history of metadata relating to digital information, followed by an overview of different metadata types, functions, and domain-specific definitions. Next, the family of standards comprising a metadata architecture are defined, followed by an overview of metadata generation processes, applications, and people: this latter section gives particular attention to automatic metadata generation approaches. The following section explores four key metadata models. The conclusion summarizes the entry, highlights a number of significant metadata challenges, and notes efforts underway to address metadata challenges in the new millennium.

Content

Digital unter: http://dx.doi.org/10.1081/E-ELIS3-120044415. Vgl.: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/book/10.1081/E-ELIS3.

Source

Encyclopedia of library and information sciences. 3rd ed. Ed.: M.J. Bates

0.062224608 = product of:
  0.124449216 = sum of:
    0.086163655 = weight(_text_:digital in 2342) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.086163655 = score(doc=2342,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.4358155 = fieldWeight in 2342, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2342)
    0.03828556 = weight(_text_:library in 2342) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03828556 = score(doc=2342,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.29050803 = fieldWeight in 2342, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2342)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Source

Journal of digital information. 2(2002) no.2,

0.057791512 = product of:
  0.115583025 = sum of:
    0.061256893 = weight(_text_:library in 2840) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.061256893 = score(doc=2840,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.46481284 = fieldWeight in 2840, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2840)
    0.054326132 = product of:
      0.108652264 = sum of:
        0.108652264 = weight(_text_:22 in 2840) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.108652264 = score(doc=2840,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = 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(2/4)

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1

0.05752562 = product of:
  0.11505124 = sum of:
    0.0844228 = weight(_text_:digital in 1192) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0844228 = score(doc=1192,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.42701027 = fieldWeight in 1192, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1192)
    0.030628446 = weight(_text_:library in 1192) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030628446 = score(doc=1192,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 1192, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1192)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

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.

0.05644991 = product of:
  0.11289982 = sum of:
    0.073112294 = weight(_text_:digital in 4779) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.073112294 = score(doc=4779,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.36980176 = fieldWeight in 4779, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4779)
    0.039787523 = weight(_text_:library in 4779) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.039787523 = score(doc=4779,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.30190483 = fieldWeight in 4779, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4779)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

NDLTD, the Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations, supports and encourages the production and archiving of electronic theses and dissertations (ETDs). While many current NDLTD member institutions and consortia have individual collections accessible online, there has until recently been no single mechanism to aggregate all ETDs to provide NDLTD-wide services (e.g. searching). With the emergence of the Open Archives Initiative (OAI), that has changed. The OAI's Protocol for Metadata Harvesting is a robust interoperability solution that defines a standard method of exchanging metadata. While working with the OAI to develop and test the metadata harvesting standard, we have set up and actively maintain a central NDLTD metadata collection and multiple user portals. We discuss in this article our experiences in building this distributed digital library based upon the work of the OAI.

Source

Library hi tech. 21(2003) no.2, S.219-227

0.056123044 = product of:
  0.11224609 = sum of:
    0.068930924 = weight(_text_:digital in 5513) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.068930924 = score(doc=5513,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.34865242 = fieldWeight in 5513, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5513)
    0.043315165 = weight(_text_:library in 5513) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.043315165 = score(doc=5513,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.32867232 = fieldWeight in 5513, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5513)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Provides an introductory overview to the subject of metadata, which considers why metadata issues are central to discussions about the evolution of library services-particularly digital library services-and why the cataloging community is, and should be, front and center in those discussions.

0.05419812 = product of:
  0.10839624 = sum of:
    0.068930924 = weight(_text_:digital in 1251) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.068930924 = score(doc=1251,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.34865242 = fieldWeight in 1251, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1251)
    0.039465316 = product of:
      0.07893063 = sum of:
        0.07893063 = weight(_text_:project in 1251) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07893063 = score(doc=1251,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.37308553 = fieldWeight in 1251, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1251)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Metadata generation is the act of creating or producing metadata. Generating good quality metadata in an efficient manner is essential for organizing and making accessible the growing number of rich resources available an the Web. The success of digital libraries, the sustenance of interoperability - as promoted by the Open Archives Initiative - and the evolution of Semantic Web all rely an efficient metadata generation. This article sketches a metadata generation framework that involves processes, people and tools. It also presents selected research initiatives and highlights the goals of the Metadata Generation Research Project.