Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Objektdokumentation"
  • × type_ss:"a"
  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  1. Marty, P.F.: Museum informatics (2009) 0.05 
    0.050106924 = product of:
  0.075160384 = sum of:
    0.052695833 = weight(_text_:resources in 5000) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.052695833 = score(doc=5000,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051133685 = queryNorm
        0.28231642 = fieldWeight in 5000, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5000)
    0.022464553 = product of:
      0.044929106 = sum of:
        0.044929106 = weight(_text_:management in 5000) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.044929106 = score(doc=5000,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17235184 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133685 = queryNorm
            0.2606825 = fieldWeight in 5000, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5000)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Museum informatics is the study of the sociotechnical interactions that take place at the intersection of people, information, and technology in museums. This entry presents an overview of museum informatics, covering such topics as information representation, information organization and access, information management, information technology, information interactions, and information professionals in museums. It explores the impact of information science and technology on museums, museum professionals, and museum visitors, and argues that museum researchers must take a sociotechnical approach to studying the use of information resources and technologies in museums.
  2. O'Keefe, E.; Oldal, M.: Cataloging Cultural Objects (CCO) (2009) 0.02 
    0.021292333 = product of:
  0.063876994 = sum of:
    0.063876994 = weight(_text_:resources in 3759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.063876994 = score(doc=3759,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051133685 = queryNorm
        0.34221917 = fieldWeight in 3759, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3759)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    The entry provides an overview of the data content standard, Cataloging Cultural Objects (CCO), developed by the Visual Resources Association (VRA), and published in 2006 by the American Library Association (ALA). CCO fills a gap in the array of descriptive standards by providing guidelines for visual resources curators, museum documentation specialists, archivists, librarians, or anyone engaged in the documentation of works of art and architecture, objects of material culture, and their images. The entry begins by placing CCO within the context of object and visual image cataloging and the broader framework of data content standards. Following the organization of the guide, which is divided into three parts, General Guidelines, Elements, and Authorities, it summarizes the main features of CCO. Finally, it evaluates CCO in terms of its suitability for use by the metadata communities that form its intended audience, and its sustainability.
  3. Koch, W.: Gedanken zur Museumsdokumentation (2002) 0.01 
    0.0064184438 = product of:
  0.01925533 = sum of:
    0.01925533 = product of:
      0.03851066 = sum of:
        0.03851066 = weight(_text_:management in 1019) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03851066 = score(doc=1019,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17235184 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133685 = queryNorm
            0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 1019, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1019)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Der Begriff Museumsdokumentation hat sich im Lauf der Jahre stark verändert wobei wohl die Betonung auf "Dokumentation"liegt. Orientierten sich erste Modelle an schriftlichen Aufzeichnungen zu Objekten mittels verschiedener Arten von Karteikarten, so kann heute die Dokumentation auch als Teil der Inhaltsgewinnung (content management) aufgefasst werden. Die wissenschaftliche Zuordnung derDokumentation wird grob skizziert, wobei auf detaillierte museologische Ansätze nicht eingegangen werden kann. Im Kapitel Objektbeschreibung wird auf die MetadatenProblematik eingegangen. Es geht um einen pragmatischen Ansatz zur Modellierung von Metadaten und Relationen. Ein Exkurs in das Gebiet des semantischen Netzes rundet dieses Kapitel ab. Dokumentation als Teil von Dokumentationsprozessen und Informationssystemen beschäftigt sich mit vorhandenen, in Museen selbst einzusetzenden Sammlungsverwaltungsprogrammen, es wird aber auch die Partnerschaf mit externen Dienstleistern angesprochen. NeueFormen der technischen Realisierung ermöglichen die Partnerschaf verschiedener Service-Anbieter, sodass die Abhängigkeit von einzelnen Technologie-Lieferanten gemildert wird. Im letzten Kapitel wird die Möglichkeit aufgezeigt, wie Museen am elektronischen Geschäftsverkehr teilnehmen können, wobei derZugang zu thematisch und personalisiert aufbereiteten Informationen über mobile Geräte mit dem Einsatz neuer Technologien an Bedeutung gewinnen wird.
  4. Dworman, G.O.; Kimbrough, S.O.; Patch, C.: On pattern-directed search of arcives and collections (2000) 0.01 
    0.005348703 = product of:
  0.016046109 = sum of:
    0.016046109 = product of:
      0.032092217 = sum of:
        0.032092217 = weight(_text_:management in 4289) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032092217 = score(doc=4289,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17235184 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133685 = queryNorm
            0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 4289, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4289)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    This article begins by presenting and discussing the distinction between record-oriented and pattern-oriented search. Examples or recordoriented (or item-oriented) questions include: "What (or how many, etc.) glass items made prior to 100 A.D. do we have in our collection?" and "How many paintings featuring dogs do we have that were painted during the 19th century, and who painted them?" Standard database systems are well suited to answering such questions, based on the data in, for example, a collections management system. Examples of pattern-oriented questions include: "How does the (apparent) productoin of glass objects vary over time between 400 B.C. and 100 A.D.?" and "What other animals are present in paintings with dogs (painted during the 19th century and in our collection)?" Standard database systems are not well suited to answering these sorts of questions, even though the basic data is properly stored in them. To answer pattern-oriented questions it is the accepted solution to transform the underlying (relational) data to what is called the data cube or cross tabulation form. We discuss how this can be done for non-numeric data, such as are found in museum collections and archives

Authors

Languages