Search (137 results, page 1 of 7)

0.06361559 = sum of:
  0.010471107 = product of:
    0.04188443 = sum of:
      0.04188443 = weight(_text_:authors in 2668) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04188443 = score(doc=2668,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.23758973 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052116565 = 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)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.053144485 = sum of:
    0.02843072 = weight(_text_:g in 2668) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02843072 = score(doc=2668,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19574708 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.7559474 = idf(docFreq=2809, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052116565 = queryNorm
        0.14524212 = fieldWeight in 2668, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.7559474 = idf(docFreq=2809, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2668)
    0.024713762 = weight(_text_:22 in 2668) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024713762 = score(doc=2668,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18250333 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052116565 = 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)

0.049372934 = sum of:
  0.020942215 = product of:
    0.08376886 = sum of:
      0.08376886 = weight(_text_:authors in 5133) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08376886 = score(doc=5133,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.23758973 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052116565 = queryNorm
          0.35257778 = fieldWeight in 5133, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5133)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.02843072 = product of:
    0.05686144 = sum of:
      0.05686144 = weight(_text_:g in 5133) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05686144 = score(doc=5133,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.19574708 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.7559474 = idf(docFreq=2809, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052116565 = queryNorm
          0.29048425 = fieldWeight in 5133, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.7559474 = idf(docFreq=2809, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5133)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This article presents a case study of quality management for print and electronic resource metadata, summarizing problems and solutions encountered by the Cataloging and Discovery Services Department in the George A. Smathers Libraries at the University of Florida. The authors discuss national, state, and local standards for cataloging, automated and manual record enhancements for data, user feedback, and statewide consortial factors. Findings show that adherence to standards, proactive cleanup of data via manual processes and automated tools, collaboration with vendors and stakeholders, and continual assessment of workflows are key to the management of biblio-graphic data quality in consortial academic libraries.

0.049372934 = sum of:
  0.020942215 = product of:
    0.08376886 = sum of:
      0.08376886 = weight(_text_:authors in 5160) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08376886 = score(doc=5160,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.23758973 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052116565 = queryNorm
          0.35257778 = fieldWeight in 5160, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5160)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.02843072 = product of:
    0.05686144 = sum of:
      0.05686144 = weight(_text_:g in 5160) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05686144 = score(doc=5160,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.19574708 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.7559474 = idf(docFreq=2809, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052116565 = queryNorm
          0.29048425 = fieldWeight in 5160, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.7559474 = idf(docFreq=2809, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5160)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This article presents a case study of quality management issues for electronic resource metadata to assess the support of user tasks (find, select, and obtain library resources) and potential for increased efficiencies in acquisitions and cataloging workflows. The authors evaluated the quality of existing bibliographic records (mostly vendor supplied) for e-resource collections as compared with records for the same collections in OCLC's WorldShare Collection Manager (WCM). Findings are that WCM records better support user tasks by containing more summaries and tables of contents; other checkpoints are largely comparable between the two source record groups. The transition to WCM records is discussed.

0.039133694 = sum of:
  0.01795047 = product of:
    0.07180188 = sum of:
      0.07180188 = weight(_text_:authors in 4748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07180188 = score(doc=4748,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.23758973 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052116565 = 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)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.021183224 = product of:
    0.04236645 = sum of:
      0.04236645 = weight(_text_:22 in 4748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04236645 = score(doc=4748,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18250333 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052116565 = 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)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

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

0.035266384 = sum of:
  0.014958725 = product of:
    0.0598349 = sum of:
      0.0598349 = weight(_text_:authors in 1249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0598349 = score(doc=1249,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.23758973 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052116565 = queryNorm
          0.25184128 = fieldWeight in 1249, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1249)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.020307658 = product of:
    0.040615316 = sum of:
      0.040615316 = weight(_text_:g in 1249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.040615316 = score(doc=1249,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.19574708 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.7559474 = idf(docFreq=2809, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052116565 = queryNorm
          0.20748875 = fieldWeight in 1249, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.7559474 = idf(docFreq=2809, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1249)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The Dublin Core metadata community and the INDECS/DOI community of authors, rights holders, and publishers are seeking common ground in the expression of metadata for information resources. Recent meetings at the 6th Dublin Core Workshop in Washington DC sketched out common models for semantics (informed by the requirements articulated in the IFLA Functional Requirements for the Bibliographic Record) and conventions for knowledge representation (based on the Resource Description Framework under development by the W3C). Further development of detailed requirements is planned by both communities in the coming months with the aim of fully representing the metadata needs of each. An open "Schema Harmonization" working group has been established to identify a common framework to support interoperability among these communities. The present document represents a starting point identifying historical developments and common requirements of these perspectives on metadata and charts a path for harmonizing their respective conceptual models. It is hoped that collaboration over the coming year will result in agreed semantic and syntactic conventions that will support a high degree of interoperability among these communities, ideally expressed in a single data model and using common, standard tools.

0.031046014 = sum of:
  0.016923865 = product of:
    0.06769546 = sum of:
      0.06769546 = weight(_text_:authors in 367) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06769546 = score(doc=367,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.23758973 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052116565 = 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)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.01412215 = product of:
    0.0282443 = sum of:
      0.0282443 = weight(_text_:22 in 367) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0282443 = score(doc=367,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18250333 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052116565 = 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)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

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.

0.029957606 = product of:
  0.05991521 = sum of:
    0.05991521 = product of:
      0.11983042 = sum of:
        0.11983042 = weight(_text_:22 in 5743) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11983042 = score(doc=5743,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18250333 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052116565 = 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)
  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

0.0282443 = product of:
  0.0564886 = sum of:
    0.0564886 = product of:
      0.1129772 = sum of:
        0.1129772 = weight(_text_:22 in 4899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1129772 = score(doc=4899,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18250333 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052116565 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

16. 7.2000 20:58:22

0.0282443 = product of:
  0.0564886 = sum of:
    0.0564886 = product of:
      0.1129772 = sum of:
        0.1129772 = weight(_text_:22 in 2840) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1129772 = score(doc=2840,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18250333 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052116565 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 2840, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2840)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1

0.024713762 = product of:
  0.049427524 = sum of:
    0.049427524 = product of:
      0.09885505 = sum of:
        0.09885505 = weight(_text_:22 in 4407) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09885505 = score(doc=4407,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18250333 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052116565 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

28. 3.2002 9:22:34

0.024713762 = product of:
  0.049427524 = sum of:
    0.049427524 = product of:
      0.09885505 = sum of:
        0.09885505 = weight(_text_:22 in 7196) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09885505 = score(doc=7196,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18250333 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052116565 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 7196, 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=7196)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1

0.024713762 = product of:
  0.049427524 = sum of:
    0.049427524 = product of:
      0.09885505 = sum of:
        0.09885505 = weight(_text_:22 in 2841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09885505 = score(doc=2841,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18250333 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052116565 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 2841, 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=2841)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2

0.021183224 = product of:
  0.04236645 = sum of:
    0.04236645 = product of:
      0.0847329 = sum of:
        0.0847329 = weight(_text_:22 in 6048) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0847329 = score(doc=6048,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18250333 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052116565 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6048, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6048)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 9.2007 15:41:14

0.020731246 = sum of:
  0.010577417 = product of:
    0.042309668 = sum of:
      0.042309668 = weight(_text_:authors in 133) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042309668 = score(doc=133,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.23758973 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052116565 = queryNorm
          0.17807868 = fieldWeight in 133, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=133)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.010153829 = product of:
    0.020307658 = sum of:
      0.020307658 = weight(_text_:g in 133) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.020307658 = score(doc=133,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.19574708 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.7559474 = idf(docFreq=2809, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052116565 = queryNorm
          0.10374437 = fieldWeight in 133, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.7559474 = idf(docFreq=2809, maxDocs=44218)
            0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=133)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Part II consists of five papers on specific metadata standards and applications. Anita Coleman presents an element-by-element description of how to create Dublin Core metadata for Web resources to be included in a library catalog, using principles inspired by cataloging practice, in her paper "From Cataloging to Metadata: Dublin Core Records for the Library Catalog." The next three papers provide especially excellent introductory overviews of three diverse types of metadata-related standards: "Metadata Standards for Archival Control: An Introduction to EAD and EAC" by Alexander C. Thurman, "Introduction to XML" by Patrick Yott, and "METS: the Metadata Encoding and Transmission Standard" by Linda Cantara. Finally, Michael Chopey offers a superb and most useful overview of "Planning and Implementing a Metadata-Driven Digital Repository." Although all of the articles in this book contain interesting, often illuminating, and potentially useful information, not all serve equally well as introductory material for working catalogers not already familiar with metadata. It would be difficult to consider this volume, taken as a whole, as truly a "primer" for catalog librarians, as the subtitle implies. The content of the articles is too much a mix of introductory essays and original research, some of it at a relatively more advanced level. The collection does not approach the topic in the kind of coherent, systematic, or comprehensive way that would be necessary for a true "primer" or introductory textbook. While several of the papers would be quite appropriate for a primer, such a text would need to include, among other things, coverage of other metadata schemes and protocols such as TEI, VRA, and OAI, which are missing here. That having been said, however, Dr. Smiraglia's excellent introduction to the volume itself serves as a kind of concise, well-written "mini-primer" for catalogers new to metadata. It succinctly covers definitions of metadata, basic concepts, content designation and markup languages, metadata for resource description, including short overviews of TEI, DC, EAD, and AACR2/MARC21, and introduces the papers included in the book. In the conclusion to this essay, Dr. Smiraglia says about the book: "In the end the contents go beyond the definition of primer as `introductory textbook.' But the authors have collectively compiled a thought-provoking volume about the uses of metadata" (p. 15). This is a fair assessment of the work taken as a whole. In this reviewer's opinion, there is to date no single introductory textbook on metadata that is fully satisfactory for both working catalogers and for library and information science (LIS) students who may or may not have had exposure to cataloging. But there are a handful of excellent books that serve different aspects of that function. These include the following recent publications:
- Caplan, Priscilla. 2003. Metadata fundamentals for all librarians. Chicago: ALA Editions. - Gorman, G.E. and Daniel G. Dorner, eds. 2004. Metadata applications and management. International yearbook of library and information management 2003/2004. Lanham, Md.: Scarecrow Press. - Intner, Sheila S., Susan S. Lazinger and Jean Weihs. 2006. Metadata and its impact on libraries. Westport, Conn.: Libraries Unlimited. - Haynes, David. 2004. Metadata for information management and retrieval. London: Facet. - Hillmann, Diane I. and Elaine L. Westbrooks, eds. 2004. Metadata in practice. Chicago: American Library Association. Metadata: A Cataloger's Primer compares favorably with these texts, and like them has its own special focus and contribution to make to the introductorylevel literature on metadata. Although the focus, purpose, and nature of the contents are different, this volume bears a similarity to the Hillmann and Westbrooks text insofar as it consists of a collection of papers written by various authors tied together by a general, common theme. In conclusion, this volume makes a significant contribution to the handful of books that attempt to present introductory level information about metadata to catalog librarians and students. Although it does not serve fully satisfactorily as a stand-alone textbook for an LIS course nor as a single unified and comprehensive introduction for catalogers, it, like the others mentioned above, could serve as an excellent supplementary LIS course text, and it is highly worthwhile reading for working catalogers who want to learn more about metadata, as well as librarians and instructors already well-versed in metadata topics."

0.020307658 = product of:
  0.040615316 = sum of:
    0.040615316 = product of:
      0.08123063 = sum of:
        0.08123063 = weight(_text_:g in 1279) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08123063 = score(doc=1279,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19574708 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.7559474 = idf(docFreq=2809, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052116565 = queryNorm
            0.4149775 = fieldWeight in 1279, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.7559474 = idf(docFreq=2809, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1279)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.020307658 = product of:
  0.040615316 = sum of:
    0.040615316 = product of:
      0.08123063 = sum of:
        0.08123063 = weight(_text_:g in 1280) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08123063 = score(doc=1280,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19574708 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.7559474 = idf(docFreq=2809, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052116565 = queryNorm
            0.4149775 = fieldWeight in 1280, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.7559474 = idf(docFreq=2809, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1280)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.020307658 = product of:
  0.040615316 = sum of:
    0.040615316 = product of:
      0.08123063 = sum of:
        0.08123063 = weight(_text_:g in 5110) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08123063 = score(doc=5110,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19574708 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.7559474 = idf(docFreq=2809, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052116565 = queryNorm
            0.4149775 = fieldWeight in 5110, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.7559474 = idf(docFreq=2809, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5110)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.019971736 = product of:
  0.03994347 = sum of:
    0.03994347 = product of:
      0.07988694 = sum of:
        0.07988694 = weight(_text_:22 in 2408) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07988694 = score(doc=2408,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18250333 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052116565 = 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)
  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

0.019971736 = product of:
  0.03994347 = sum of:
    0.03994347 = product of:
      0.07988694 = sum of:
        0.07988694 = weight(_text_:22 in 2845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07988694 = score(doc=2845,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18250333 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052116565 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

9.12.2005 19:22:38

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.175-181

0.017652689 = product of:
  0.035305377 = sum of:
    0.035305377 = product of:
      0.070610754 = sum of:
        0.070610754 = weight(_text_:22 in 1032) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.070610754 = score(doc=1032,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18250333 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052116565 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 5.1998 18:45:36