Search (79 results, page 1 of 4)

  • × theme_ss:"Metadaten"
  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  1. Franklin, R.A.: Re-inventing subject access for the semantic web (2003) 0.11 
    0.11113332 = product of:
  0.16669998 = sum of:
    0.06374531 = weight(_text_:subject in 2556) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06374531 = score(doc=2556,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.15522492 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043400183 = queryNorm
        0.41066417 = fieldWeight in 2556, 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=2556)
    0.10295467 = sum of:
      0.06767392 = weight(_text_:headings in 2556) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06767392 = score(doc=2556,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.21048847 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
            0.043400183 = queryNorm
          0.3215089 = fieldWeight in 2556, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2556)
      0.035280753 = weight(_text_:22 in 2556) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035280753 = score(doc=2556,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15198004 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.043400183 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2556, 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=2556)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    First generation scholarly research on the Web lacked a firm system of authority control. Second generation Web research is beginning to model subject access with library science principles of bibliographic control and cataloguing. Harnessing the Web and organising the intellectual content with standards and controlled vocabulary provides precise search and retrieval capability, increasing relevance and efficient use of technology. Dublin Core metadata standards permit a full evaluation and cataloguing of Web resources appropriate to highly specific research needs and discovery. Current research points to a type of structure based on a system of faceted classification. This system allows the semantic and syntactic relationships to be defined. Controlled vocabulary, such as the Library of Congress Subject Headings, can be assigned, not in a hierarchical structure, but rather as descriptive facets of relating concepts. Web design features such as this are adding value to discovery and filtering out data that lack authority. The system design allows for scalability and extensibility, two technical features that are integral to future development of the digital library and resource discovery.
    Date
    30.12.2008 18:22:46
  2. Chan, L.M.; Childress, E.; Dean, R.; O'Neill, E.T.; Vizine-Goetz, D.: ¬A faceted approach to subject data in the Dublin Core metadata record (2001) 0.09 
    0.094468445 = product of:
  0.14170267 = sum of:
    0.085874535 = weight(_text_:subject in 6109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.085874535 = score(doc=6109,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.15522492 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043400183 = queryNorm
        0.5532265 = fieldWeight in 6109, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6109)
    0.05582813 = product of:
      0.11165626 = sum of:
        0.11165626 = weight(_text_:headings in 6109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11165626 = score(doc=6109,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.21048847 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043400183 = queryNorm
            0.5304626 = fieldWeight in 6109, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6109)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    This article describes FAST, the Faceted Application of Subject Terminology, a project at OCLC to make Library of Congress Subject Headings easier to use in Dublin Core metadata by breaking out facets of space, time, and form. Work on FAST can be watched at its web site, http://www.miskatonic.org/library/, which has recent presentations and reports. It is interesting to see facets and Dublin Core combined, though both LCSH and FAST subject headings are beyond what most people making a small faceted classification would want or need.
  3. Banush, D.; Kurth, M:; Pajerek, J.: Rehabilitating killer serials : an automated strategy for maintaining E-journal metadata (2005) 0.08 
    0.077643365 = product of:
  0.11646505 = sum of:
    0.030669477 = weight(_text_:subject in 124) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030669477 = score(doc=124,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15522492 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043400183 = queryNorm
        0.19758089 = fieldWeight in 124, 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=124)
    0.08579557 = sum of:
      0.056394935 = weight(_text_:headings in 124) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.056394935 = score(doc=124,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.21048847 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
            0.043400183 = queryNorm
          0.2679241 = fieldWeight in 124, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=124)
      0.029400628 = weight(_text_:22 in 124) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.029400628 = score(doc=124,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15198004 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.043400183 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 124, 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=124)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Cornell University Library (CUL) has developed a largely automated method for providing title-level catalog access to electronic journals made available through aggregator packages. CUL's technique for automated e-journal record creation and maintenance relies largely on the conversion of externally supplied metadata into streamlined, abbreviated-level MARC records. Unlike the Cooperative Online Serials Cataloging Program's recently implemented aggregator-neutral approach to e-journal cataloging, CUL's method involves the creation of a separate bibliographic record for each version of an e-journal title in order to facilitate automated record maintenance. An indexed local field indicates the aggregation to which each title belongs and enables machine manipulation of all the records associated with a specific aggregation. Information encoded in another locally defined field facilitates the identification of all of the library's e-journal titles and allows for the automatic generation of a Web-based title list of e-journals. CUL's approach to providing title-level catalog access to its e-journal aggregations involves a number of tradeoffs in which some elements of traditional bibliographic description (such as subject headings and linking fields) are sacrificed in the interest of timeliness and affordability. URLs (Uniform Resource Locators) and holdings information are updated on a regular basis by use of automated methods that save on staff costs.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  4. Gardner, T.; Iannella, R.: Architecture and software solutions (2000) 0.07 
    0.072342835 = product of:
  0.10851425 = sum of:
    0.08499375 = weight(_text_:subject in 4867) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08499375 = score(doc=4867,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.15522492 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043400183 = queryNorm
        0.5475522 = fieldWeight in 4867, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4867)
    0.023520501 = product of:
      0.047041003 = sum of:
        0.047041003 = weight(_text_:22 in 4867) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047041003 = score(doc=4867,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15198004 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043400183 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4867, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4867)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    The current subject gateways have evolved over time when the discipline of Internet resource discovery was in its infancy. This is reflected by the lack of well-established, light-weight, deployable, easy-to-use, standards for metadata and information retrieval. We provide an introduction to the architecture, standards and software solutions in use by subject gateways, and to the issues that must be addressed to support future subject gateways
    Date
    22. 6.2002 19:38:24
  5. Heery, R.: Information gateways : collaboration and content (2000) 0.06 
    0.063299984 = product of:
  0.094949976 = sum of:
    0.074369535 = weight(_text_:subject in 4866) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.074369535 = score(doc=4866,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.15522492 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043400183 = queryNorm
        0.4791082 = fieldWeight in 4866, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4866)
    0.020580439 = product of:
      0.041160878 = sum of:
        0.041160878 = weight(_text_:22 in 4866) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041160878 = score(doc=4866,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15198004 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043400183 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4866, 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=4866)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Information subject gateways provide targeted discovery services for their users, giving access to Web resources selected according to quality and subject coverage criteria. Information gateways recognise that they must collaborate on a wide range of issues relating to content to ensure continued success. This report is informed by discussion of content activities at the 1999 Imesh Workshop. The author considers the implications for subject based gateways of co-operation regarding coverage policy, creation of metadata, and provision of searching and browsing across services. Other possibilities for co-operation include working more closely with information providers, and diclosure of information in joint metadata registries
    Date
    22. 6.2002 19:38:54
  6. Peereboom, M.: DutchESS : Dutch Electronic Subject Service - a Dutch national collaborative effort (2000) 0.06 
    0.061945073 = product of:
  0.092917606 = sum of:
    0.06939711 = weight(_text_:subject in 4869) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06939711 = score(doc=4869,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.15522492 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043400183 = queryNorm
        0.4470745 = fieldWeight in 4869, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4869)
    0.023520501 = product of:
      0.047041003 = sum of:
        0.047041003 = weight(_text_:22 in 4869) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047041003 = score(doc=4869,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15198004 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043400183 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4869, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4869)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    This article gives an overview of the design and organisation of DutchESS, a Dutch information subject gateway created as a national collaborative effort of the National Library and a number of academic libraries. The combined centralised and distributed model of DutchESS is discussed, as well as its selection policy, its metadata format, classification scheme and retrieval options. Also some options for future collaboration on an international level are explored
    Date
    22. 6.2002 19:39:23
  7. Gömpel, R.; Altenhöner, R.; Kunz, M.; Oehlschläger, S.; Werner, C.: Weltkongress Bibliothek und Information, 70. IFLA-Generalkonferenz in Buenos Aires : Aus den Veranstaltungen der Division IV Bibliographic Control, der Core Activities ICABS und UNIMARC sowie der Information Technology Section (2004) 0.05 
    0.04874159 = product of:
  0.07311238 = sum of:
    0.03879416 = weight(_text_:subject in 2874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03879416 = score(doc=2874,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.15522492 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043400183 = queryNorm
        0.24992225 = fieldWeight in 2874, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2874)
    0.034318224 = sum of:
      0.022557972 = weight(_text_:headings in 2874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.022557972 = score(doc=2874,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.21048847 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
            0.043400183 = queryNorm
          0.107169636 = fieldWeight in 2874, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
            0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2874)
      0.011760251 = weight(_text_:22 in 2874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.011760251 = score(doc=2874,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15198004 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.043400183 = queryNorm
          0.07738023 = fieldWeight in 2874, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2874)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    "Libraries: Tools for Education and Development" war das Motto der 70. IFLA-Generalkonferenz, dem Weltkongress Bibliothek und Information, der vom 22.-27. August 2004 in Buenos Aires, Argentinien, und damit erstmals in Lateinamerika stattfand. Rund 3.000 Teilnehmerinnen und Teilnehmer, davon ein Drittel aus spanischsprachigen Ländern, allein 600 aus Argentinien, besuchten die von der IFLA und dem nationalen Organisationskomitee gut organisierte Tagung mit mehr als 200 Sitzungen und Veranstaltungen. Aus Deutschland waren laut Teilnehmerverzeichnis leider nur 45 Kolleginnen und Kollegen angereist, womit ihre Zahl wieder auf das Niveau von Boston gesunken ist. Erfreulicherweise gab es nunmehr bereits im dritten Jahr eine deutschsprachige Ausgabe des IFLA-Express. Auch in diesem Jahr soll hier über die Veranstaltungen der Division IV Bibliographic Control berichtet werden. Die Arbeit der Division mit ihren Sektionen Bibliography, Cataloguing, Classification and Indexing sowie der neuen Sektion Knowledge Management bildet einen der Schwerpunkte der IFLA-Arbeit, die dabei erzielten konkreten Ergebnisse und Empfehlungen haben maßgeblichen Einfluss auf die tägliche Arbeit der Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare. Erstmals wird auch ausführlich über die Arbeit der Core Activities ICABS und UNIMARC und der Information Technology Section berichtet.
    Content
    Aus den Arbeitsgruppen der Cataloguing Sektion: Schwerpunkt der Arbeiten der ISBD Review Group bleibt die Fortsetzung des generellen Revisionsprojekts. 2004 konnte die revidierte ISBD(G) veröffentlicht werden Für die Revision der ISBD(A) wurde eine Study Group aus Experten für das Alte Buch gebildet. Das weltweite Stellungnahmeverfahren ist für Frühjahr 2005 geplant. Bezüglich der Revision der ISBD(ER) konnten im weltweiten Stellungnahmeverfahren aufgekommene Fragen während der Sitzungen in Buenos Aires abschließend geklärt werden. Die Veröffentlichung der neuen ISBD(ER) ist für Ende 2004 / Anfang 2005 geplant. Die Revision der ISBD(CM) ist im Rahmen einer gemeinsamen Arbeitsgruppe der ISBD Review Group und der Sektion Geographie und Karten weiter vorangekommen. Für die Revision der ISBD(NBM) soll eine eigene Study Group gebildet werden. Die FRBR Review Group konnte erste Fortschritte bei der Erreichung der im vergangenen Jahr gesetzten Ziele Erarbeitung einer Richtlinie zur Anwendung der FRBR bei der Katalogisierung, Erweiterung der FRBR-Web-Seite im IFLAnet, um bei anderen communities (Archive, Museen etc.) für das Modell zu werben, sowie Überarbeitung des FRBR-Modells vermeIden. Von den in Berlin gebildeten fünf FRBR-Arbeitsgruppen (Expression entity Working Group, Working Group an continuing resources, Working Group an teaching and training, Working Group an subject relationships and classification, Working Group an FRBR/CRM dialogue) sind einige bereits aktiv gewesen, vor allem die letztgenannte Working Group an FRBR/CRM dialogue. Die "Working Group an subject relationships and classification" soll demnächst in Zusammenarbeit mit der Classification and Indexing Section etabliert werden. Ziel hierbei ist es, die FRBR auch auf den Bereich der Inhaltserschließung auszuweiten. Die "Working Group an continuing resources" hat in Buenos Aires beschlossen, ihre Arbeit nicht fortzuführen, da die FRBR in ihrer derzeitigen Fassung "seriality" nicht ausreichend berücksichtigen. Es ist geplant, eine neue Arbeitsgruppe unter Einbeziehung ausgewiesener Experten für fortlaufende Werke zu bilden, die sich mit diesem Problem beschäftigen soll. Für das IFLA Multilingual Dictionary of Cataloguing Terms and Concepts - MulDiCat' konnten die Richtlinien für die Eingabe in die Datenbank fertig gestellt und erforderliche Änderungen in der Datenbank implementiert werden. Die Datenbank dieses IFLA-Projekts enthält mittlerweile alle englischsprachigen Definitionen des AACR2-Glossars, die deutschen Übersetzungen der AACR2-Glossar-Definitionen sowie alle ISBD-Definitionen. Im nächsten Schritt sollen Einträge für die FRBR-Terminologie ergänzt werden. Ebenso sollen Ergänzungen zu den englischen Einträgen vorgenommen werden (aus AACR, ISBD, FRBR und weiteren IFLA-Publikationen). Die Guidelines for OPAC Displays (Richtlinien zur Präsentation von Suchergebnissen im OPAC) stehen nach der Durchführung des weltweiten Stellungnahmeverfahrens zur Veröffentlichung im IFLAnet bereit. Die Working Group an OPAC Displays hat damit ihre Arbeit beendet.
    Classification and Indexing Section (Sektion Klassifikation und Indexierung) Die Working Group an Guidelines for Multilingual Thesauri hat ihre Arbeit abgeschlossen, die Richtlinien werden Ende 2004 im IFLAnet zur Verfügung stehen. Die 2003 ins Leben gerufene Arbeitsgruppe zu Mindeststandards der Inhaltserschließung in Nationalbibliographien hat sich in Absprache mit den Mitgliedern des Standing Committee auf den Namen "Guidelines for minimal requirements for subject access by national bibliographic agencies" verständigt. Als Grundlage der zukünftigen Arbeit soll der "Survey an Subject Heading Languages Used in National Libraries and Bibliographies" von Magda HeinerFreiling dienen. Davon ausgehend soll eruiert werden, welche Arten von Medienwerken mit welchen Instrumentarien und in welcher Tiefe erschlossen werden. Eine weitere Arbeitsgruppe der Sektion befasst sich mit dem sachlichen Zugriff auf Netzpublikationen (Working Group an Subject Access to Web Resources). Die Veranstaltung "Implementation and adaption of global tools for subject access to local needs" fand regen Zuspruch. Drei Vortragende zeigten auf, wie in ihrem Sprachgebiet die Subject Headings der Library of Congress (LoC) übernommen werden (Development of a Spanish subject heading list und Subject indexing in Sweden) bzw. wie sich die Zusammenarbeit mit der LoC gestalten lässt, um den besonderen terminologischen Bedürfnissen eines Sprach- und Kulturraums außerhalb der USA Rechnung zu tragen (The SACO Program in Latin America). Aus deutscher Sicht verdiente der Vortrag "Subject indexing between international standards and local context - the Italian case" besondere Beachtung. Die Entwicklung eines Regelwerks zur verbalen Sacherschließung und die Erarbeitung einer italienischen Schlagwortnormdatei folgen nämlich erklärtermaßen der deutschen Vorgehensweise mit RSWK und SWD.
  8. Margaritopoulos, T.; Margaritopoulos, M.; Mavridis, I.; Manitsaris, A.: ¬A conceptual framework for metadata quality assessment (2008) 0.04 
    0.03629583 = product of:
  0.054443747 = sum of:
    0.036803372 = weight(_text_:subject in 2643) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.036803372 = score(doc=2643,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15522492 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043400183 = queryNorm
        0.23709705 = fieldWeight in 2643, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2643)
    0.017640376 = product of:
      0.035280753 = sum of:
        0.035280753 = weight(_text_:22 in 2643) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035280753 = score(doc=2643,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15198004 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043400183 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2643, 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=2643)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Metadata quality of digital resources in a repository is an issue directly associated with the repository's efficiency and value. In this paper, the subject of metadata quality is approached by introducing a new conceptual framework that defines it in terms of its fundamental components. Additionally, a method for assessing these components by exploiting structural and semantic relations among the resources is presented. These relations can be used to generate implied logic rules, which include, impose or prohibit certain values in the fields of a metadata record. The use of such rules can serve as a tool for conducting quality control in the records, in order to diagnose deficiencies and errors.
    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
  9. Guidarelli, N.M.: Subject data in the metadata record (2000) 0.03 
    0.034698553 = product of:
  0.10409565 = sum of:
    0.10409565 = weight(_text_:subject in 439) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10409565 = score(doc=439,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.15522492 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043400183 = queryNorm
        0.67061174 = fieldWeight in 439, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=439)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Reports on a discussion forum of the ALCTS SAC Subcommittee on metadata and subject analysis
  10. Garrison, W.A.: ¬The Colorado Digitization Project : subject access issues (2003) 0.03 
    0.03200355 = product of:
  0.096010655 = sum of:
    0.096010655 = weight(_text_:subject in 3955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.096010655 = score(doc=3955,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.15522492 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043400183 = queryNorm
        0.61852604 = fieldWeight in 3955, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3955)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    The Colorado Digitization Project (CDP), begun in the fall of 1998, is a collaborative initiative that involves Colorado's archives, historical societies, libraries, and museums. The project is creating a union catalogue of metadata records and is investigating the use of Dewey Decimal Classification numbers through WebDewey to allow linkage of general subject terms and highly specialized subject terms within a subject browse feature of the union catalogue.
    Source
    Subject retrieval in a networked environment: Proceedings of the IFLA Satellite Meeting held in Dublin, OH, 14-16 August 2001 and sponsored by the IFLA Classification and Indexing Section, the IFLA Information Technology Section and OCLC. Ed.: I.C. McIlwaine
  11. Hsieh-Yee, I.: Cataloging and metatdata education in North American LIS programs (2004) 0.03 
    0.030246526 = product of:
  0.04536979 = sum of:
    0.030669477 = weight(_text_:subject in 138) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030669477 = score(doc=138,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15522492 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043400183 = queryNorm
        0.19758089 = fieldWeight in 138, 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=138)
    0.014700314 = product of:
      0.029400628 = sum of:
        0.029400628 = weight(_text_:22 in 138) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029400628 = score(doc=138,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15198004 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043400183 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 138, 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=138)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    This paper presents findings of a survey an the state of cataloging and metadata education. in ALA-accredited library and information science progranis in North America. The survey was conducted in response to Action Item 5.1 of the "Bibliographic Control of Web Resources: A Library of Congress Action Plan," which focuses an providing metadata education to new LIS professionals. The study found LIS programs increased their reliance an introductory courses to cover cataloging and metadata, but fewer programs than before had a cataloging course requirement. The knowledge of cataloging delivered in introductory courses was basic, and the coverage of metadata was limited to an overview. Cataloging courses showed similarity in coverage and practice and focused an print mater!als. Few cataloging educators provided exercises in metadata record creation using non-AACR standards. Advanced cataloging courses provided in-depth coverage of subject cataloging and the cataloging of nonbook resources, but offered very limited coverage of metadata. Few programs offered full courses an metadata, and even fewer offered advanced metadata courses. Metadata topics were well integrated into LIS curricula, but coverage of metadata courses varied from program to program, depending an the interests of instructors. Educators were forward-looking and agreed an the inclusion of specific knowledge and skills in metadata instruction. A series of actions were proposed to assist educators in providing students with competencies in cataloging and metadata.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  12. Final Report to the ALCTS CCS SAC Subcommittee on Metadata and Subject Analysis (2001) 0.03 
    0.02833125 = product of:
  0.08499375 = sum of:
    0.08499375 = weight(_text_:subject in 5016) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08499375 = score(doc=5016,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.15522492 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043400183 = queryNorm
        0.5475522 = fieldWeight in 5016, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5016)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    The charge for the SAC Subcommittee on Metadata and Subject Analysis states: Identify and study the major issues surrounding the use of metadata in the subject analysis and classification of digital resources. Provide discussion forums and programs relevant to these issues. Discussion forums should begin by Annual 1998. The continued need for the subcommittee should be reexamined by SAC no later than 2001.
  13. Howarth, L.C.: Metadata schemes for subject gateways (2003) 0.02 
    0.024535581 = product of:
  0.073606744 = sum of:
    0.073606744 = weight(_text_:subject in 1747) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.073606744 = score(doc=1747,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15522492 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043400183 = queryNorm
        0.4741941 = fieldWeight in 1747, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1747)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  14. Rice, R.: Applying DC to institutional data repositories (2008) 0.02 
    0.02419722 = product of:
  0.03629583 = sum of:
    0.024535581 = weight(_text_:subject in 2664) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024535581 = score(doc=2664,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15522492 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043400183 = queryNorm
        0.15806471 = fieldWeight in 2664, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2664)
    0.011760251 = product of:
      0.023520501 = sum of:
        0.023520501 = weight(_text_:22 in 2664) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023520501 = score(doc=2664,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15198004 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043400183 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2664, 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=2664)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    DISC-UK DataShare (2007-2009), a project led by the University of Edinburgh and funded by JISC (Joint Information Systems Committee, UK), arises from an existing consortium of academic data support professionals working in the domain of social science datasets (Data Information Specialists Committee-UK). We are working together across four universities with colleagues engaged in managing open access repositories for e-prints. Our project supports 'early adopter' academics who wish to openly share datasets and presents a model for depositing 'orphaned datasets' that are not being deposited in subject-domain data archives/centres. Outputs from the project are intended to help to demystify data as complex objects in repositories, and assist other institutional repository managers in overcoming barriers to incorporating research data. By building on lessons learned from recent JISC-funded data repository projects such as SToRe and GRADE the project will help realize the vision of the Digital Repositories Roadmap, e.g. the milestone under Data, "Institutions need to invest in research data repositories" (Heery and Powell, 2006). Application of appropriate metadata is an important area of development for the project. Datasets are not different from other digital materials in that they need to be described, not just for discovery but also for preservation and re-use. The GRADE project found that for geo-spatial datasets, Dublin Core metadata (with geo-spatial enhancements such as a bounding box for the 'coverage' property) was sufficient for discovery within a DSpace repository, though more indepth metadata or documentation was required for re-use after downloading. The project partners are examining other metadata schemas such as the Data Documentation Initiative (DDI) versions 2 and 3, used primarily by social science data archives (Martinez, 2008). Crosswalks from the DDI to qualified Dublin Core are important for describing research datasets at the study level (as opposed to the variable level which is largely out of scope for this project). DataShare is benefiting from work of of the DRIADE project (application profile development for evolutionary biology) (Carrier, et al, 2007), eBank UK (developed an application profile for crystallography data) and GAP (Geospatial Application Profile, in progress) in defining interoperable Dublin Core qualified metadata elements and their application to datasets for each partner repository. The solution devised at Edinburgh for DSpace will be covered in the poster.
    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
  15. Slavic, A.: General library classification in learning material metadata : the application in IMS/LOM and CDMES metadata schemas (2003) 0.02 
    0.021248437 = product of:
  0.06374531 = sum of:
    0.06374531 = weight(_text_:subject in 3961) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06374531 = score(doc=3961,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.15522492 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043400183 = queryNorm
        0.41066417 = fieldWeight in 3961, 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=3961)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    This paper analyses the approach to resource discovery in the educational domain and stresses this community's need for a subject approach to information. The use of both general (Dublin Core) and domain specific (IEEE Learning Object Metadata/IMS Metadata) metadata schemas for learning resource discovery suggests that library classification could be used for subject description. There are several reasons why this indexing language might be suitable for the indexing of education resources. The paper will explain the reasoning behind the application of Universal Decimal Classification in the EASEL (Educator's Access to Services in the Electronic Landscape - http://www.fdgroup.com/easel) project. EASEL deploys two Dublin Core and several different application profiles of LOM i.e. IMS Metadata and this paper will explain how these two types of metadata support the use of classification.
    Source
    Subject retrieval in a networked environment: Proceedings of the IFLA Satellite Meeting held in Dublin, OH, 14-16 August 2001 and sponsored by the IFLA Classification and Indexing Section, the IFLA Information Technology Section and OCLC. Ed.: I.C. McIlwaine
  16. Barrueco Cruz, J.M.; Krichel, T.: Subject description in the Academic Metadata Format (2003) 0.02 
    0.02044632 = product of:
  0.061338954 = sum of:
    0.061338954 = weight(_text_:subject in 3548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.061338954 = score(doc=3548,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15522492 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043400183 = queryNorm
        0.39516178 = fieldWeight in 3548, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3548)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  17. Huthwaite, A.: AACR2 and other metadata standards : the way forward (2003) 0.02 
    0.017349277 = product of:
  0.052047826 = sum of:
    0.052047826 = weight(_text_:subject in 5508) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.052047826 = score(doc=5508,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.15522492 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043400183 = queryNorm
        0.33530587 = fieldWeight in 5508, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5508)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Changes in the environment in which the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules, second edition (AACR2), currently operates are examined, including the growth in electronic publishing and use of the Internet, and the development and increasing use of a range of other metadata standards, such as the Dublin Core. AACR2 and other metadata standards, particularly the Dublin Core, are compared. It is argued that AACR2 should continue to be used for describing selected Web-based resources. Criteria for deciding whether to use AACR2 or another metadata standard are defined, drawing on the experiences of two Brisbane universities in developing mechanisms for providing access to electronic resources. Five options are evaluated: catalog only (direct entry); catalog only (indirect entry); subject gateway only; catalog and subject gateway combined; and shared databases, such as CORC. The option chosen by the two universities is identified and explained. Revisions to the rules in AACR2 for cataloging electronic resources resulting from decisions made through 2000 are described. Possible future revisions are also explored.
  18. Lazinger, S.S.: Digital preservation and metadata : history, theory, practice (2002) 0.02 
    0.016357055 = product of:
  0.049071163 = sum of:
    0.049071163 = weight(_text_:subject in 1262) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.049071163 = score(doc=1262,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15522492 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043400183 = queryNorm
        0.31612942 = fieldWeight in 1262, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1262)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Footnote
    Rez. in: JASIST 53(2002) no.14, S.1271-1272 (D.G. Law): "All in all this amkes an excellent primer for the subject"
  19. Schottlaender, B.E.C.: Why metadata? Why now? Why me? (2003) 0.02 
    0.016357055 = product of:
  0.049071163 = sum of:
    0.049071163 = weight(_text_:subject in 5513) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.049071163 = score(doc=5513,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15522492 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043400183 = queryNorm
        0.31612942 = fieldWeight in 5513, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5513)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    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.
  20. Andresen, L.: Metadata in Denmark (2000) 0.02 
    0.015680335 = product of:
  0.047041003 = sum of:
    0.047041003 = product of:
      0.094082005 = sum of:
        0.094082005 = weight(_text_:22 in 4899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.094082005 = score(doc=4899,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15198004 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043400183 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 4899, 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=4899)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Date
    16. 7.2000 20:58:22

Authors

Languages

  • e 72
  • d 6
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 68
  • el 8
  • s 4
  • m 3
  • b 2
  • r 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications