Search (626 results, page 1 of 32)

  • × theme_ss:"Metadaten"
  1. Baker, T.: Dublin Core Application Profiles : current approaches (2010) 0.08 
    0.07702677 = sum of:
  0.030877274 = product of:
    0.18526363 = sum of:
      0.18526363 = weight(_text_:baker in 3737) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.18526363 = score(doc=3737,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.35112646 = queryWeight, product of:
            7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          0.5276265 = fieldWeight in 3737, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3737)
    0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
  0.0461495 = sum of:
    0.010287089 = weight(_text_:a in 3737) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010287089 = score(doc=3737,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.050867476 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0441157 = queryNorm
        0.20223314 = fieldWeight in 3737, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3737)
    0.03586241 = weight(_text_:22 in 3737) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03586241 = score(doc=3737,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15448566 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0441157 = queryNorm
        0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3737, 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=3737)
    Abstract
    The Dublin Core Metadata Initiative currently defines a Dublin Core Application Profile as a set of specifications about the metadata design of a particular application or for a particular domain or community of users. The current approach to application profiles is summarized in the Singapore Framework for Application Profiles [SINGAPORE-FRAMEWORK] (see Figure 1). While the approach originally developed as a means of specifying customized applications based on the fifteen elements of the Dublin Core Element Set (e.g., Title, Date, Subject), it has evolved into a generic approach to creating metadata that meets specific local requirements while integrating coherently with other RDF-based metadata.
    Source
    Wissensspeicher in digitalen Räumen: Nachhaltigkeit - Verfügbarkeit - semantische Interoperabilität. Proceedings der 11. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation, Konstanz, 20. bis 22. Februar 2008. Hrsg.: J. Sieglerschmidt u. H.P.Ohly
    Type
    a
  2. Baker, T.; Dekkers, M.; Heery, R.; Patel, M.; Salokhe, G.: What Terms Does Your Metadata Use? : Application Profiles as Machine-Understandable Narratives (2002) 0.08 
    0.07601857 = sum of:
  0.07277844 = product of:
    0.43667063 = sum of:
      0.43667063 = weight(_text_:baker in 1279) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.43667063 = score(doc=1279,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.35112646 = queryWeight, product of:
            7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          1.2436278 = fieldWeight in 1279, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1279)
    0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
  0.003240128 = product of:
    0.006480256 = sum of:
      0.006480256 = weight(_text_:a in 1279) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.006480256 = score(doc=1279,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.050867476 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 1279, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1279)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Footnote
    http://jodi.ecs.soton.ac.uk/Articles/v02/i02/Baker/
    Type
    a
  3. Baker, T.: ¬A grammar of Dublin Core (2000) 0.06 
    0.06461188 = sum of:
  0.029111374 = product of:
    0.17466824 = sum of:
      0.17466824 = weight(_text_:baker in 1236) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.17466824 = score(doc=1236,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.35112646 = queryWeight, product of:
            7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          0.4974511 = fieldWeight in 1236, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1236)
    0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
  0.035500508 = sum of:
    0.011592236 = weight(_text_:a in 1236) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011592236 = score(doc=1236,freq=40.0), product of:
        0.050867476 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0441157 = queryNorm
        0.22789092 = fieldWeight in 1236, product of:
          6.3245554 = tf(freq=40.0), with freq of:
            40.0 = termFreq=40.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1236)
    0.023908272 = weight(_text_:22 in 1236) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023908272 = score(doc=1236,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15448566 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0441157 = 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)
    Abstract
    Dublin Core is often presented as a modern form of catalog card -- a set of elements (and now qualifiers) that describe resources in a complete package. Sometimes it is proposed as an exchange format for sharing records among multiple collections. The founding principle that "every element is optional and repeatable" reinforces the notion that a Dublin Core description is to be taken as a whole. This paper, in contrast, is based on a much different premise: Dublin Core is a language. More precisely, it is a small language for making a particular class of statements about resources. Like natural languages, it has a vocabulary of word-like terms, the two classes of which -- elements and qualifiers -- function within statements like nouns and adjectives; and it has a syntax for arranging elements and qualifiers into statements according to a simple pattern. Whenever tourists order a meal or ask directions in an unfamiliar language, considerate native speakers will spontaneously limit themselves to basic words and simple sentence patterns along the lines of "I am so-and-so" or "This is such-and-such". Linguists call this pidginization. In such situations, a small phrase book or translated menu can be most helpful. By analogy, today's Web has been called an Internet Commons where users and information providers from a wide range of scientific, commercial, and social domains present their information in a variety of incompatible data models and description languages. In this context, Dublin Core presents itself as a metadata pidgin for digital tourists who must find their way in this linguistically diverse landscape. Its vocabulary is small enough to learn quickly, and its basic pattern is easily grasped. It is well-suited to serve as an auxiliary language for digital libraries. This grammar starts by defining terms. It then follows a 200-year-old tradition of English grammar teaching by focusing on the structure of single statements. It concludes by looking at the growing dictionary of Dublin Core vocabulary terms -- its registry, and at how statements can be used to build the metadata equivalent of paragraphs and compositions -- the application profile.
    Date
    26.12.2011 14:01:22
    Footnote
    Vgl.: http://dlib.ukoln.ac.uk/dlib/october00/baker/10baker.html.
    Type
    a
  4. Wessel, C.: "Publishing and sharing your metadata application profile" : 2. SCHEMAS-Workshop in Bonn (2001) 0.06 
    0.05561175 = sum of:
  0.029111374 = product of:
    0.17466824 = sum of:
      0.17466824 = weight(_text_:baker in 5650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.17466824 = score(doc=5650,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.35112646 = queryWeight, product of:
            7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          0.4974511 = fieldWeight in 5650, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5650)
    0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
  0.026500374 = sum of:
    0.0025921026 = weight(_text_:a in 5650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0025921026 = score(doc=5650,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.050867476 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0441157 = queryNorm
        0.050957955 = fieldWeight in 5650, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5650)
    0.023908272 = weight(_text_:22 in 5650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023908272 = score(doc=5650,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15448566 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0441157 = queryNorm
        0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 5650, 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=5650)
    Abstract
    Immer mehr Institutionen erkennen die Bedeutung von Metadaten für die Auffindung elektronischer Dokumente und entwickeln ihr eigenes, domain-spezifisches Application Profile. Sie wählen aus einem bereits existierenden Set von Metadaten ein für ihre Bedürfnisse passendes Subset aus, fügen lokale Ergänzungen hinzu und passen die Definitionen an. Um andere über die eigenen Anwendungen zu informieren, ist es sinnvoll, die jeweiligen Application Profiles zu veröffentlichen. Dadurch wird eine Nachnutzung ermöglicht und neuen Anwendern die Entwicklung eigener Profile erleichtert. Weitere Vorteile wären eine Standardisierung der Metadatenelemente und -formate und Erhöhung der Interoperabilität. In diesem Kontext entstehende Fragen wurden auf dem 2. SCHEMAS-Workshop diskutiert, der vom 23. bis 24. November 2000 in Bonn stattfand. Die einzelnen Vorträge finden sich unter <http://lwww. schemas-forum.org/workshops/ws2/Programme.htm/>. SCHEMAS1 ist die Bezeichnung für ein "Forum for Metadata Schema Implementors". Dieses EU-Projekt wird getragen von Makx Dekkers (PricewaterhouseCoopers), Tom Baker (GMD) und Rachel Heery (UKOLN). In seiner Einführung erläuterte Makx Dekkers die Ziele von SCHEMAS: Da es viele verschiedene Schemes zur Beschreibung von Internet-Ressourcen gibt, wächst die Notwendigkeit der Entwicklung von Standards zur Vermeidung von Doppelarbeit und Konfusion. SCHEMAS stellt Informationen bereit (Metadata Watch Reports, Standards Framework Reports, Guidelines), veranstaltet Workshops und entwickelt ein Registry, in dem Metadatenprofile gesammelt werden sollen. Dadurch sollen Anwender von Metadatenformaten über den Status und neue Entwicklungen im Bereich Metadaten informiert werden. Über die Definition des Begriffs Application Profile war bereits beim 8. Workshop der Dublin Core Metadata Initiative in Ottawa im Oktober2 diskutiert worden. Rachel Heery legte nun folgende Definition vor: In einem "Namespace Schema" werden neue Elemente genannt und definiert, so dass ein standardisiertes Set entsteht. Ein "Application Profile" nutzt bereits vorhandene Elemente aus einem oder mehreren Namespace Schemas nach und optimiert diese für eine bestimmte Anwendung. Da die Zahl der Namespaces und Application Profiles ständig zunimmt, ist es sinnvoll, sie an einer zentralen Stelle zu registrieren. Diese Zentralstelle will das SCHEMAS Registry werden. Tom Baker beschrieb dessen Funktion mit einem Vergleich aus der Linguistik: Metadaten sind eine Sprache, Registries das Wörterbuch. Wie ein Wörterbuch, so hat auch ein Registry zwei Aufgaben: Es beschreibt Sprache anhand von Gebrauchsbeispielen und schreibt diesen Gebrauch vor, indem es Empfehlungen gibt (describe and prescribe). Dadurch entsteht ein Standard für diese Sprache
    Date
    11. 3.2001 17:10:22
    Type
    a
  5. Kurth, M.; Ruddy, D.; Rupp, N.: Repurposing MARC metadata : using digital project experience to develop a metadata management design (2004) 0.05 
    0.054686412 = sum of:
  0.010129825 = product of:
    0.06077895 = sum of:
      0.06077895 = weight(_text_:authors in 4748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06077895 = score(doc=4748,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20111527 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          0.30220953 = fieldWeight in 4748, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4748)
    0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
  0.044556588 = sum of:
    0.0086941775 = weight(_text_:a in 4748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0086941775 = score(doc=4748,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.050867476 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0441157 = queryNorm
        0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 4748, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4748)
    0.03586241 = weight(_text_:22 in 4748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03586241 = score(doc=4748,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15448566 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0441157 = queryNorm
        0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4748, 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=4748)
    Abstract
    Metadata and information technology staff in libraries that are building digital collections typically extract and manipulate MARC metadata sets to provide access to digital content via non-MARC schemes. Metadata processing in these libraries involves defining the relationships between metadata schemes, moving metadata between schemes, and coordinating the intellectual activity and physical resources required to create and manipulate metadata. Actively managing the non-MARC metadata resources used to build digital collections is something most of these libraries have only begun to do. This article proposes strategies for managing MARC metadata repurposing efforts as the first step in a coordinated approach to library metadata management. Guided by lessons learned from Cornell University library mapping and transformation activities, the authors apply the literature of data resource management to library metadata management and propose a model for managing MARC metadata repurposing processes through the implementation of a metadata management design.
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.144-152
    Type
    a
  6. Jimenez, V.O.R.: Nuevas perspectivas para la catalogacion : metadatos ver MARC (1999) 0.05 
    0.05460526 = product of:
  0.10921052 = sum of:
    0.10921052 = sum of:
      0.007776308 = weight(_text_:a in 5743) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.007776308 = score(doc=5743,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.050867476 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 5743, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5743)
      0.101434216 = weight(_text_:22 in 5743) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.101434216 = score(doc=5743,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.15448566 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          0.6565931 = fieldWeight in 5743, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5743)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    30. 3.2002 19:45:22
    Source
    Revista Española de Documentaçion Cientifica. 22(1999) no.2, S.198-219
    Type
    a
  7. Andresen, L.: Metadata in Denmark (2000) 0.05 
    0.05300075 = product of:
  0.1060015 = sum of:
    0.1060015 = sum of:
      0.0103684105 = weight(_text_:a in 4899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0103684105 = score(doc=4899,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.050867476 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 4899, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4899)
      0.09563309 = weight(_text_:22 in 4899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.09563309 = score(doc=4899,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15448566 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = 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)
    Date
    16. 7.2000 20:58:22
    Type
    a
  8. Baker, T.: Languages for Dublin Core (1998) 0.05 
    0.051930472 = sum of:
  0.047841616 = product of:
    0.14352484 = sum of:
      0.035454385 = weight(_text_:authors in 1257) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035454385 = score(doc=1257,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20111527 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          0.17628889 = fieldWeight in 1257, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1257)
      0.108070455 = weight(_text_:baker in 1257) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.108070455 = score(doc=1257,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.35112646 = queryWeight, product of:
            7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          0.30778214 = fieldWeight in 1257, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1257)
    0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
  0.0040888567 = product of:
    0.0081777135 = sum of:
      0.0081777135 = weight(_text_:a in 1257) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0081777135 = score(doc=1257,freq=26.0), product of:
          0.050867476 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          0.16076508 = fieldWeight in 1257, product of:
            5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
              26.0 = termFreq=26.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1257)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Over the past three years, the Dublin Core Metadata Initiative has achieved a broad international consensus on the semantics of a simple element set for describing electronic resources. Since the first workshop in March 1995, which was reported in the very first issue of D-Lib Magazine, Dublin Core has been the topic of perhaps a dozen articles here. Originally intended to be simple and intuitive enough for authors to tag Web pages without special training, Dublin Core is being adapted now for more specialized uses, from government information and legal deposit to museum informatics and electronic commerce. To meet such specialized requirements, Dublin Core can be customized with additional elements or qualifiers. However, these refinements can compromise interoperability across applications. There are tradeoffs between using specific terms that precisely meet local needs versus general terms that are understood more widely. We can better understand this inevitable tension between simplicity and complexity if we recognize that metadata is a form of human language. With Dublin Core, as with a natural language, people are inclined to stretch definitions, make general terms more specific, specific terms more general, misunderstand intended meanings, and coin new terms. One goal of this paper, therefore, will be to examine the experience of some related ways to seek semantic interoperability through simplicity: planned languages, interlingua constructs, and pidgins. The problem of semantic interoperability is compounded when we consider Dublin Core in translation. All of the workshops, documents, mailing lists, user guides, and working group outputs of the Dublin Core Initiative have been in English. But in many countries and for many applications, people need a metadata standard in their own language. In principle, the broad elements of Dublin Core can be defined equally well in Bulgarian or Hindi. Since Dublin Core is a controlled standard, however, any parallel definitions need to be kept in sync as the standard evolves. Another goal of the paper, then, will be to define the conceptual and organizational problem of maintaining a metadata standard in multiple languages. In addition to a name and definition, which are meant for human consumption, each Dublin Core element has a label, or indexing token, meant for harvesting by search engines. For practical reasons, these machine-readable tokens are English-looking strings such as Creator and Subject (just as HTML tags are called HEAD, BODY, or TITLE). These tokens, which are shared by Dublin Cores in every language, ensure that metadata fields created in any particular language are indexed together across repositories. As symbols of underlying universal semantics, these tokens form the basis of semantic interoperability among the multiple Dublin Cores. As long as we limit ourselves to sharing these indexing tokens among exact translations of a simple set of fifteen broad elements, the definitions of which fit easily onto two pages, the problem of Dublin Core in multiple languages is straightforward. But nothing having to do with human language is ever so simple. Just as speakers of various languages must learn the language of Dublin Core in their own tongues, we must find the right words to talk about a metadata language that is expressable in many discipline-specific jargons and natural languages and that inevitably will evolve and change over time.
    Type
    a
  9. Moen, W.E.: ¬The metadata approach to accessing government information (2001) 0.05 
    0.046375655 = product of:
  0.09275131 = sum of:
    0.09275131 = sum of:
      0.009072359 = weight(_text_:a in 4407) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.009072359 = score(doc=4407,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.050867476 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 4407, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4407)
      0.08367895 = weight(_text_:22 in 4407) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08367895 = score(doc=4407,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15448566 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4407, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4407)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    28. 3.2002 9:22:34
    Type
    a
  10. Baker, T.: ¬A multilingual registry for Dublin Core elements and qualifiers (2000) 0.04 
    0.040559664 = sum of:
  0.036023486 = product of:
    0.21614091 = sum of:
      0.21614091 = weight(_text_:baker in 4447) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.21614091 = score(doc=4447,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.35112646 = queryWeight, product of:
            7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          0.6155643 = fieldWeight in 4447, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4447)
    0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
  0.0045361794 = product of:
    0.009072359 = sum of:
      0.009072359 = weight(_text_:a in 4447) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.009072359 = score(doc=4447,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.050867476 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 4447, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4447)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The Dublin Core Metadata Element Set (DCMES) provides 15 high-level, generic concepts for describing a broad range of resources. In actual implementations, these generic concepts must often be made more precise to meet the needs of a specific discipline or application. To support this, the Dublin Core Metadata Initiative has defined standard ways to refine or contextualize an element with 'qualifiers' - for example, to distinguish between Author, Illustrator, and Editor as types of Creator. As other articles in this issue have discussed, the DCMI is currently focusing much of its attention on standardizing qualifiers that have been found to be useful to implementors
    Type
    a
  11. Tennant, R.: ¬A bibliographic metadata infrastructure for the twenty-first century (2004) 0.04 
    0.04016073 = product of:
  0.08032146 = sum of:
    0.08032146 = sum of:
      0.012698658 = weight(_text_:a in 2845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.012698658 = score(doc=2845,freq=12.0), product of:
          0.050867476 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          0.24964198 = fieldWeight in 2845, product of:
            3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
              12.0 = termFreq=12.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2845)
      0.0676228 = weight(_text_:22 in 2845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0676228 = score(doc=2845,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.15448566 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 2845, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2845)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The current library bibliographic infrastructure was constructed in the early days of computers - before the Web, XML, and a variety of other technological advances that now offer new opportunities. General requirements of a modern metadata infrastructure for libraries are identified, including such qualities as versatility, extensibility, granularity, and openness. A new kind of metadata infrastructure is then proposed that exhibits at least some of those qualities. Some key challenges that must be overcome to implement a change of this magnitude are identified.
    Date
    9.12.2005 19:22:38
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.175-181
    Type
    a
  12. Baker, T.; Dekkers, M.: Identifying metadata elements with URIs : The CORES resolution (2003) 0.04 
    0.039952524 = sum of:
  0.03565401 = product of:
    0.21392405 = sum of:
      0.21392405 = weight(_text_:baker in 1199) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.21392405 = score(doc=1199,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.35112646 = queryWeight, product of:
            7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          0.6092507 = fieldWeight in 1199, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1199)
    0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
  0.004298516 = product of:
    0.008597032 = sum of:
      0.008597032 = weight(_text_:a in 1199) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.008597032 = score(doc=1199,freq=22.0), product of:
          0.050867476 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          0.16900843 = fieldWeight in 1199, product of:
            4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
              22.0 = termFreq=22.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1199)
    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.
    Footnote
    Vgl.: http://dlib.ukoln.ac.uk/dlib/july03/baker/07baker.html.
    Type
    a
  13. Willis, C.; Greenberg, J.; White, H.: Analysis and synthesis of metadata goals for scientific data (2012) 0.04 
    0.03925488 = sum of:
  0.009550491 = product of:
    0.057302944 = sum of:
      0.057302944 = weight(_text_:authors in 367) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.057302944 = score(doc=367,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.20111527 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          0.28492588 = fieldWeight in 367, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=367)
    0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
  0.02970439 = sum of:
    0.005796118 = weight(_text_:a in 367) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005796118 = score(doc=367,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.050867476 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0441157 = queryNorm
        0.11394546 = fieldWeight in 367, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=367)
    0.023908272 = weight(_text_:22 in 367) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023908272 = score(doc=367,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15448566 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0441157 = queryNorm
        0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 367, 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=367)
    Abstract
    The proliferation of discipline-specific metadata schemes contributes to artificial barriers that can impede interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research. The authors considered this problem by examining the domains, objectives, and architectures of nine metadata schemes used to document scientific data in the physical, life, and social sciences. They used a mixed-methods content analysis and Greenberg's () metadata objectives, principles, domains, and architectural layout (MODAL) framework, and derived 22 metadata-related goals from textual content describing each metadata scheme. Relationships are identified between the domains (e.g., scientific discipline and type of data) and the categories of scheme objectives. For each strong correlation (>0.6), a Fisher's exact test for nonparametric data was used to determine significance (p < .05). Significant relationships were found between the domains and objectives of the schemes. Schemes describing observational data are more likely to have "scheme harmonization" (compatibility and interoperability with related schemes) as an objective; schemes with the objective "abstraction" (a conceptual model exists separate from the technical implementation) also have the objective "sufficiency" (the scheme defines a minimal amount of information to meet the needs of the community); and schemes with the objective "data publication" do not have the objective "element refinement." The analysis indicates that many metadata-driven goals expressed by communities are independent of scientific discipline or the type of data, although they are constrained by historical community practices and workflows as well as the technological environment at the time of scheme creation. The analysis reveals 11 fundamental metadata goals for metadata documenting scientific data in support of sharing research data across disciplines and domains. The authors report these results and highlight the need for more metadata-related research, particularly in the context of recent funding agency policy changes.
    Type
    a
  14. Caplan, P.; Guenther, R.: Metadata for Internet resources : the Dublin Core Metadata Elements Set and its mapping to USMARC (1996) 0.04 
    0.036403503 = product of:
  0.07280701 = sum of:
    0.07280701 = sum of:
      0.0051842052 = weight(_text_:a in 2408) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0051842052 = score(doc=2408,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.050867476 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 2408, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2408)
      0.0676228 = weight(_text_:22 in 2408) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0676228 = score(doc=2408,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.15448566 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 2408, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2408)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    13. 1.2007 18:31:22
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) nos.3/4, S.43-58
    Type
    a
  15. Kopácsi, S. et al.: Development of a classification server to support metadata harmonization in a long term preservation system (2016) 0.04 
    0.03549741 = product of:
  0.07099482 = sum of:
    0.07099482 = sum of:
      0.011224135 = weight(_text_:a in 3280) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.011224135 = score(doc=3280,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.050867476 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          0.22065444 = fieldWeight in 3280, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3280)
      0.05977068 = weight(_text_:22 in 3280) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05977068 = score(doc=3280,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15448566 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3280, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3280)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Metadata and semantics research: 10th International Conference, MTSR 2016, Göttingen, Germany, November 22-25, 2016, Proceedings. Eds.: E. Garoufallou
    Type
    a
  16. Hajra, A. et al.: Enriching scientific publications from LOD repositories through word embeddings approach (2016) 0.03 
    0.034467574 = product of:
  0.06893515 = sum of:
    0.06893515 = sum of:
      0.009164467 = weight(_text_:a in 3281) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.009164467 = score(doc=3281,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.050867476 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          0.18016359 = fieldWeight in 3281, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3281)
      0.05977068 = weight(_text_:22 in 3281) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05977068 = score(doc=3281,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15448566 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3281, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3281)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Metadata and semantics research: 10th International Conference, MTSR 2016, Göttingen, Germany, November 22-25, 2016, Proceedings. Eds.: E. Garoufallou
    Type
    a
  17. 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 (2008) 0.03 
    0.033633072 = sum of:
  0.0059090643 = product of:
    0.035454385 = sum of:
      0.035454385 = weight(_text_:authors in 2668) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035454385 = score(doc=2668,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20111527 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          0.17628889 = fieldWeight in 2668, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2668)
    0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
  0.027724009 = sum of:
    0.0068042697 = weight(_text_:a in 2668) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0068042697 = score(doc=2668,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.050867476 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0441157 = queryNorm
        0.13376464 = fieldWeight in 2668, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2668)
    0.020919738 = weight(_text_:22 in 2668) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020919738 = score(doc=2668,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15448566 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0441157 = queryNorm
        0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 2668, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2668)
    Abstract
    Metadata is a key aspect of our evolving infrastructure for information management, social computing, and scientific collaboration. DC-2008 will focus on metadata challenges, solutions, and innovation in initiatives and activities underlying semantic and social applications. Metadata is part of the fabric of social computing, which includes the use of wikis, blogs, and tagging for collaboration and participation. Metadata also underlies the development of semantic applications, and the Semantic Web - the representation and integration of multimedia knowledge structures on the basis of semantic models. These two trends flow together in applications such as Wikipedia, where authors collectively create structured information that can be extracted and used to enhance access to and use of information sources. Recent discussion has focused on how existing bibliographic standards can be expressed as Semantic Web vocabularies to facilitate the ingration of library and cultural heritage data with other types of data. Harnessing the efforts of content providers and end-users to link, tag, edit, and describe their information in interoperable ways ("participatory metadata") is a key step towards providing knowledge environments that are scalable, self-correcting, and evolvable. DC-2008 will explore conceptual and practical issues in the development and deployment of semantic and social applications to meet the needs of specific communities of practice.
    Content
    Carol Jean Godby, Devon Smith, Eric Childress: Encoding Application Profiles in a Computational Model of the Crosswalk. - Maria Elisabete Catarino, Ana Alice Baptista: Relating Folksonomies with Dublin Core. - Ed Summers, Antoine Isaac, Clay Redding, Dan Krech: LCSH, SKOS and Linked Data. - Xia Lin, Jiexun Li, Xiaohua Zhou: Theme Creation for Digital Collections. - Boris Lauser, Gudrun Johannsen, Caterina Caracciolo, Willem Robert van Hage, Johannes Keizer, Philipp Mayr: Comparing Human and Automatic Thesaurus Mapping Approaches in the Agricultural Domain. - P. Bryan Heidorn, Qin Wei: Automatic Metadata Extraction From Museum Specimen Labels. - Stuart Allen Sutton, Diny Golder: Achievement Standards Network (ASN): An Application Profile for Mapping K-12 Educational Resources to Achievement Standards. - Allen H. Renear, Karen M. Wickett, Richard J. Urban, David Dubin, Sarah L. Shreeves: Collection/Item Metadata Relationships. - Seth van Hooland, Yves Bontemps, Seth Kaufman: Answering the Call for more Accountability: Applying Data Profiling to Museum Metadata. - Thomas Margaritopoulos, Merkourios Margaritopoulos, Ioannis Mavridis, Athanasios Manitsaris: A Conceptual Framework for Metadata Quality Assessment. - Miao Chen, Xiaozhong Liu, Jian Qin: Semantic Relation Extraction from Socially-Generated Tags: A Methodology for Metadata Generation. - Hak Lae Kim, Simon Scerri, John G. Breslin, Stefan Decker, Hong Gee Kim: The State of the Art in Tag Ontologies: A Semantic Model for Tagging and Folksonomies. - Martin Malmsten: Making a Library Catalogue Part of the Semantic Web. - Philipp Mayr, Vivien Petras: Building a Terminology Network for Search: The KoMoHe Project. - Michael Panzer: Cool URIs for the DDC: Towards Web-scale Accessibility of a Large Classification System. - Barbara Levergood, Stefan Farrenkopf, Elisabeth Frasnelli: The Specification of the Language of the Field and Interoperability: Cross-language Access to Catalogues and Online Libraries (CACAO)
  18. Hoffmann, L.: Metadaten von Internetressourcen und ihre Integrierung in Bibliothekskataloge (1998) 0.03 
    0.033125468 = product of:
  0.066250935 = sum of:
    0.066250935 = sum of:
      0.006480256 = weight(_text_:a in 1032) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.006480256 = score(doc=1032,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.050867476 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 1032, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1032)
      0.05977068 = weight(_text_:22 in 1032) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05977068 = score(doc=1032,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15448566 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 1032, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1032)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    22. 5.1998 18:45:36
    Type
    a
  19. Essen, F. von: Metadaten - neue Perspektiven für die Erschließung von Netzpublikationen in Bibliotheken : Erster META-LIB-Workshop in Göttingen (1998) 0.03 
    0.033125468 = product of:
  0.066250935 = sum of:
    0.066250935 = sum of:
      0.006480256 = weight(_text_:a in 2275) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.006480256 = score(doc=2275,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.050867476 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 2275, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2275)
      0.05977068 = weight(_text_:22 in 2275) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05977068 = score(doc=2275,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15448566 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2275, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2275)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Content
    Bericht über den Workshop, der am 22. u. 23.6.98 in der SUB Göttingen stattfand
    Type
    a
  20. Mora-Mcginity, M. et al.: MusicWeb: music discovery with open linked semantic metadata (2016) 0.03 
    0.033125468 = product of:
  0.066250935 = sum of:
    0.066250935 = sum of:
      0.006480256 = weight(_text_:a in 3282) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.006480256 = score(doc=3282,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.050867476 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 3282, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3282)
      0.05977068 = weight(_text_:22 in 3282) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05977068 = score(doc=3282,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15448566 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0441157 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3282, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3282)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Metadata and semantics research: 10th International Conference, MTSR 2016, Göttingen, Germany, November 22-25, 2016, Proceedings. Eds.: E. Garoufallou
    Type
    a

Authors

Years

Languages

Types

  • a 573
  • el 78
  • m 22
  • s 15
  • n 4
  • x 3
  • b 2
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications