Search (67 results, page 1 of 4)

0.074753575 = product of:
  0.11213036 = sum of:
    0.04800868 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04800868 = score(doc=2656,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19731061 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05068286 = queryNorm
        0.24331525 = fieldWeight in 2656, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2656)
    0.06412168 = sum of:
      0.036654368 = weight(_text_:searching in 2656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.036654368 = score(doc=2656,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20502694 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05068286 = queryNorm
          0.1787783 = fieldWeight in 2656, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2656)
      0.02746731 = weight(_text_:22 in 2656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02746731 = score(doc=2656,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17748274 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05068286 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2656, 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=2656)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

This poster explores the customization of DSpace to allow the use of the AGRIS Application Profile metadata standard and the AGROVOC thesaurus. The objective is the adaptation of DSpace, through the least invasive code changes either in the form of plug-ins or add-ons, to the specific needs of the Agricultural Sciences and Technology community. Metadata standards such as AGRIS AP, and Knowledge Organization Systems such as the AGROVOC thesaurus, provide mechanisms for sharing information in a standardized manner by recommending the use of common semantics and interoperable syntax (Subirats et al., 2007). AGRIS AP was created to enhance the description, exchange and subsequent retrieval of agricultural Document-like Information Objects (DLIOs). It is a metadata schema which draws from Metadata standards such as Dublin Core (DC), the Australian Government Locator Service Metadata (AGLS) and the Agricultural Metadata Element Set (AgMES) namespaces. It allows sharing of information across dispersed bibliographic systems (FAO, 2005). AGROVOC68 is a multilingual structured thesaurus covering agricultural and related domains. Its main role is to standardize the indexing process in order to make searching simpler and more efficient. AGROVOC is developed by FAO (Lauser et al., 2006). The customization of the DSpace is taking place in several phases. First, the AGRIS AP metadata schema was mapped onto the metadata DSpace model, with several enhancements implemented to support AGRIS AP elements. Next, AGROVOC will be integrated as a controlled vocabulary accessed through a local SKOS or OWL file. Eventually the system will be configurable to access AGROVOC through local files or remotely via webservices. Finally, spell checking and tooltips will be incorporated in the user interface to support metadata editing. Adapting DSpace to support AGRIS AP and annotation using the semantically-rich AGROVOC thesaurus transform DSpace into a powerful, domain-specific system for annotation and exchange of bibliographic metadata in the agricultural domain.

Source

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

0.04768092 = product of:
  0.07152138 = sum of:
    0.050920896 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2556) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050920896 = score(doc=2556,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19731061 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05068286 = queryNorm
        0.2580748 = fieldWeight in 2556, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2556)
    0.020600483 = product of:
      0.041200966 = sum of:
        0.041200966 = weight(_text_:22 in 2556) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041200966 = score(doc=2556,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17748274 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05068286 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  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

0.0442799 = product of:
  0.1328397 = sum of:
    0.1328397 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1999) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1328397 = score(doc=1999,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.19731061 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05068286 = queryNorm
        0.6732516 = fieldWeight in 1999, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1999)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The article is an updated and expanded version of a paper presented to International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions in 2013. It describes recent work involving the representation of International Standard for Bibliographic Description (ISBD) and UNIMARC (UNIversal MARC) in Resource Description Framework (RDF), the basis of the Semantic Web and linked data. The UNIMARC Bibliographic format is used to illustrate issues arising from the development of a bibliographic element set and its semantic alignment with ISBD. The article discusses the use of such alignments in the automated processing of linked data for interoperability, using examples from ISBD, UNIMARC, and Resource Description and Access.

Footnote

Contribution in a special issue "ISBD: The Bibliographic Content Standard "

0.040007234 = product of:
  0.1200217 = sum of:
    0.1200217 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2143) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1200217 = score(doc=2143,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.19731061 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05068286 = queryNorm
        0.6082881 = fieldWeight in 2143, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2143)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

New technologies will underpin the future generation of library catalogues. To facilitate their role providing information, serving users, and fulfilling their mission as cultural heritage and memory institutions, libraries must take a technological leap; their standards and services must be transformed to those of the Semantic Web. Bibliographic Information Organization in the Semantic Web explores the technologies that may power future library catalogues, and argues the necessity of such a leap. The text introduces international bibliographic standards and models, and fundamental concepts in their representation in the context of the Semantic Web. Subsequent chapters cover bibliographic information organization, linked open data, methodologies for publishing library metadata, discussion of the wider environment (museum, archival and publishing communities) and users, followed by a conclusion.

LCSH

Machine / readable bibliographic data

RSWK

Bibliografische Daten / Informationsmanagement / Semantic Web / Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records

Subject

Bibliografische Daten / Informationsmanagement / Semantic Web / Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records
Machine / readable bibliographic data

0.03960514 = product of:
  0.11881542 = sum of:
    0.11881542 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11881542 = score(doc=1998,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.19731061 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05068286 = queryNorm
        0.6021745 = fieldWeight in 1998, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1998)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This article explores the question "What is an International Standard for Bibliographic Description (ISBD) resource in the context of the Semantic Web, and what is the relationship of its description to the linked data?" This question is discussed against the background of the dichotomy between the description and access using the Semantic Web differentiation of the three logical layers: real-world objects, web of data, and special purpose (bibliographic) data. The representation of bibliographic data as linked data is discussed, distinguishing the description of a resource from the iconic/objective and the informational/subjective viewpoints. In the conclusion, the authors give views on possible directions of future development of the ISBD.

Footnote

Contribution in a special issue "ISBD: The Bibliographic Content Standard "

0.033947267 = product of:
  0.10184179 = sum of:
    0.10184179 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 4169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10184179 = score(doc=4169,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19731061 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05068286 = queryNorm
        0.5161496 = fieldWeight in 4169, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4169)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.032060843 = product of:
  0.096182525 = sum of:
    0.096182525 = sum of:
      0.054981556 = weight(_text_:searching in 4649) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.054981556 = score(doc=4649,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20502694 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05068286 = queryNorm
          0.26816747 = fieldWeight in 4649, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4649)
      0.041200966 = weight(_text_:22 in 4649) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041200966 = score(doc=4649,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17748274 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05068286 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4649, 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=4649)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

More and more cultural heritage institutions publish their collections, vocabularies and metadata on the Web. The resulting Web of linked cultural data opens up exciting new possibilities for searching and browsing through these cultural heritage collections. We report on ongoing work in which we investigate the estimation of relevance in this Web of Culture. We study existing measures of semantic distance and how they apply to two use cases. The use cases relate to the structured, multilingual and multimodal nature of the Culture Web. We distinguish between measures using the Web, such as Google distance and PMI, and measures using the Linked Data Web, i.e. the semantic structure of metadata vocabularies. We perform a small study in which we compare these semantic distance measures to human judgements of relevance. Although it is too early to draw any definitive conclusions, the study provides new insights into the applicability of semantic distance measures to the Web of Culture, and clear starting points for further research.

Date

26.12.2011 13:40:22

0.028005064 = product of:
  0.08401519 = sum of:
    0.08401519 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5192) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08401519 = score(doc=5192,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19731061 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05068286 = queryNorm
        0.4258017 = fieldWeight in 5192, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5192)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The paper sets out from a few basic observations (bibliographic information is still mostly part of the 'hidden web', library automation methods still have a low WWW-transparency and take-up of FRBR has been rather slow) and continues taking a closer look at semantic web technology components. This results in a proposal for implementing FRBR as RDF-Schema and of RDF-based library catalogues built on such an approach. The contribution concludes with a discussion of selected strategic benefits resulting from such an approach.

Source

Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR): hype or cure-all. Ed. by P. le Boeuf,

0.02400434 = product of:
  0.07201302 = sum of:
    0.07201302 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5510) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07201302 = score(doc=5510,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19731061 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05068286 = queryNorm
        0.3649729 = fieldWeight in 5510, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5510)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Explores the opportunities for libraries to contribute to the proposed global "Semantic Web." Library name and subject authority files, including work that IFLA has done related to a new view of "Universal Bibliographic Control" in the Internet environment and the work underway in the U.S. and Europe, are making a reality of the virtual international authority file on the Web. The bibliographic and authority records created according to AACR2 reflect standards for metadata that libraries have provided for years. New opportunities for using these records in the digital world are described (interoperability), including mapping with Dublin Core metadata. AACR2 recently updated Chapter 9 on Electronic Resources. That process and highlights of the changes are described, including Library of Congress' rule interpretations.

0.02400434 = product of:
  0.07201302 = sum of:
    0.07201302 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 4816) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07201302 = score(doc=4816,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19731061 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05068286 = queryNorm
        0.3649729 = fieldWeight in 4816, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4816)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The Federal Environment Agency (UBA), Germany, has a long tradition in knowledge organization, using a library along with many Web-based information systems. The backbone of this information space is a classification system enhanced by a reference vocabulary which consists of a thesaurus, a gazetteer and a chronicle. Over the years, classification has increasingly been relegated to the background compared with the reference vocabulary indexing and full text search. Bibliographic items are no longer classified directly but tagged with thesaurus terms, with those terms being classified. Since 2010 we have been developing a linked data representation of this knowledge base. While we are linking bibliographic and observation data with the controlled vocabulary in a Resource Desrcription Framework (RDF) representation, the classification may be revisited as a powerful organization system by inference. This also raises questions about the quality and feasibility of an unambiguous classification of thesaurus terms.

0.020710811 = product of:
  0.062132433 = sum of:
    0.062132433 = sum of:
      0.032398194 = weight(_text_:searching in 150) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.032398194 = score(doc=150,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.20502694 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05068286 = queryNorm
          0.1580192 = fieldWeight in 150, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=150)
      0.029734239 = weight(_text_:22 in 150) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.029734239 = score(doc=150,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.17748274 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05068286 = queryNorm
          0.16753313 = fieldWeight in 150, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=150)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Classification

006.7 22

Date

7. 3.2007 19:30:22

DDC

006.7 22

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST 58(2007) no.3, S.457-458 (A.M.A. Ahmad): "The concept of the semantic web has emerged because search engines and text-based searching are no longer adequate, as these approaches involve an extensive information retrieval process. The deployed searching and retrieving descriptors arc naturally subjective and their deployment is often restricted to the specific application domain for which the descriptors were configured. The new era of information technology imposes different kinds of requirements and challenges. Automatic extracted audiovisual features are required, as these features are more objective, domain-independent, and more native to audiovisual content. This book is a useful guide for researchers, experts, students, and practitioners; it is a very valuable reference and can lead them through their exploration and research in multimedia content and the semantic web. The book is well organized, and introduces the concept of the semantic web and multimedia content analysis to the reader through a logical sequence from standards and hypotheses through system examples, presenting relevant tools and methods. But in some chapters readers will need a good technical background to understand some of the details. Readers may attain sufficient knowledge here to start projects or research related to the book's theme; recent results and articles related to the active research area of integrating multimedia with semantic web technologies are included. This book includes full descriptions of approaches to specific problem domains such as content search, indexing, and retrieval. This book will be very useful to researchers in the multimedia content analysis field who wish to explore the benefits of emerging semantic web technologies in applying multimedia content approaches. The first part of the book covers the definition of the two basic terms multimedia content and semantic web. The Moving Picture Experts Group standards MPEG7 and MPEG21 are quoted extensively. In addition, the means of multimedia content description are elaborated upon and schematically drawn. This extensive description is introduced by authors who are actively involved in those standards and have been participating in the work of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO)/MPEG for many years. On the other hand, this results in bias against the ad hoc or nonstandard tools for multimedia description in favor of the standard approaches. This is a general book for multimedia content; more emphasis on the general multimedia description and extraction could be provided.

0.019867051 = product of:
  0.029800575 = sum of:
    0.02121704 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1847) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02121704 = score(doc=1847,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19731061 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05068286 = queryNorm
        0.10753117 = fieldWeight in 1847, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1847)
    0.0085835345 = product of:
      0.017167069 = sum of:
        0.017167069 = weight(_text_:22 in 1847) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017167069 = score(doc=1847,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17748274 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05068286 = queryNorm
            0.09672529 = fieldWeight in 1847, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1847)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Content

Zusammenarbeit mit Bibliotheken Bereits früh setzte sich Tim Spalding für eine Zusammenarbeit mit Bibliotheken ein. Zum Eintragen von neuen Büchern in LibraryThing können zahlreiche Bibliothekskataloge ausgewählt werden, die via Z39.50 eingebunden werden - seit Oktober 2006 ist auch der GBV dabei. Im April 2007 veröffentlichte Tim Spalding mit LibraryThing for Libraries ein Reihe von Webservices, die Bibliotheken in ihre OPACs einbinden können.4 Ein Webservice ist eine Funktion, die von anderen Programmen über das Web aufgerufen werden kann und Daten zurückliefert. Bereits seit Juni 2006 können über verschiedene offene LibraryThing-Webservices unter Anderem zu einer gegebenen ISBN die Sprache und eine Liste von ISBNs anderer Auflagen und Übersetzungen ermittelt werden, die zum gleichen Werk gehören (thinglSBN). Damit setzt LibraryThing praktisch einen Teil der Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) um, die in bibliothekswissenschaftlichen Fachkreisen bereits seit Anfang der 1990er diskutiert werden, aber bislang nicht so Recht ihre Umsetzung in Katalogen gefunden haben. Die Information darüber, welche Bücher zum gleichen Werk gehören, wird von der LibraryThing-Community bereitgestellt; jeder Benutzer kann einzelne Ausgaben mit einem Klick zusammenführen oder wieder trennen. Vergleiche mit dem ähnlichen Dienst xISBN von OCLC zeigen, dass sich thinglSBN und xISBN gut ergänzen, allerdings bietet LibraryThing seinen Webservice im Gegensatz zu OCLC kostenlos an. Neben Empfehlungen von verwandten Büchern ist es im Rahmen von LibraryThing for Libraries auch möglich, die von den Nutzern vergebenen Tags in den eigenen Katalog einzubinden. Ein Nachteil dabei ist allerdings die bisherige Übermacht der englischen Sprache und dass nur selbständige Titel mit ISBN berücksichtigt werden. Die VZG prüft derzeit, in welcher Form LibraryThing for Libraries am besten in GBV-Bibliotheken umgesetzt werden kann. Es spricht allerdings für jede einzelne Bibliothek nichts dagegen, schon jetzt damit zu experimentieren, wie der eigene OPAC mit zusätzlichen Links und Tags von LibraryThing aussehen könnte. Darüber hinaus können sich auch Bibliotheken mit einem eigenen Zugang als Nutzer in LibraryThing beteiligen. So stellt beispielsweise die Stadtbücherei Nordenham bereits seit Ende 2005 ihre Neuzugänge im Erwachsenenbestand in einer Sammlung bei LibraryThing ein.

Date

22. 9.2007 10:36:23

0.018702157 = product of:
  0.05610647 = sum of:
    0.05610647 = sum of:
      0.032072574 = weight(_text_:searching in 2665) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.032072574 = score(doc=2665,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20502694 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05068286 = queryNorm
          0.15643102 = fieldWeight in 2665, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2665)
      0.024033897 = weight(_text_:22 in 2665) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.024033897 = score(doc=2665,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17748274 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05068286 = queryNorm
          0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 2665, 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=2665)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Platforms for social computing connect users via shared references to people with whom they have relationships, events attended, places lived in or traveled to, and topics such as favorite books or movies. Since free text is insufficient for expressing such references precisely and unambiguously, many social computing platforms coin identifiers for topics, places, events, and people and provide interfaces for finding and selecting these identifiers from controlled lists. Using these interfaces, users collaboratively construct a web of links among entities. This model needn't be limited to social networking sites. Understanding an item in a digital library or museum requires context: information about the topics, places, events, and people to which the item is related. Students, journalists and investigators traditionally discover this kind of context by asking "the four Ws": what, where, when and who. The DCMI Kernel Metadata Community has recognized the four Ws as fundamental elements of descriptions (Kunze & Turner, 2007). Making better use of metadata to answer these questions via links to appropriate contextual resources has been our focus in a series of research projects over the past few years. Currently we are building a system for enabling readers of any text to relate any topic, place, event or person mentioned in the text to the best explanatory resources available. This system is being developed with two different corpora: a diverse variety of biographical texts characterized by very rich and dense mentions of people, events, places and activities, and a large collection of newly-scanned books, journals and manuscripts relating to Irish culture and history. Like a social computing platform, our system consists of tools for referring to topics, places, events or people, disambiguating these references by linking them to unique identifiers, and using the disambiguated references to provide useful information in context and to link to related resources. Yet current social computing platforms, while usually amenable to importing and exporting data, tend to mint proprietary identifiers and expect links to be traversed using their own interfaces. We take a different approach, using identifiers from both established and emerging naming authorities, representing relationships using standardized metadata vocabularies, and publishing those representations using standard protocols so that links can be stored and traversed anywhere. Central to our strategy is to move from appearances in a text to naming authorities to the the construction of links for searching or querying trusted resources. Using identifiers from naming authorities, rather than literal values (as in the DCMI Kernel) or keys from a proprietary database, makes it more likely that links constructed using our system will continue to be useful in the future. WorldCat Identities URIs (http://worldcat.org/identities/) linked to Library of Congress and Deutsche Nationalbibliothek authority files for persons and organizations and Geonames (http://geonames.org/) URIs for places are stable identifiers attached to a wealth of useful metadata. Yet no naming authority can be totally comprehensive, so our system can be extended to use new sources of identifiers as needed. For example, we are experimenting with using Freebase (http://freebase.com/) URIs to identify historical events, for which no established naming authority currently exists. Stable identifiers (URIs), standardized hyperlinked data formats (XML), and uniform publishing protocols (HTTP) are key ingredients of the web's open architecture. Our system provides an example of how this open architecture can be exploited to build flexible and useful tools for connecting resources via shared references to topics, places, events, and people.

Source

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

0.017888404 = product of:
  0.053665213 = sum of:
    0.053665213 = product of:
      0.16099563 = sum of:
        0.16099563 = weight(_text_:3a in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.16099563 = score(doc=701,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.42968985 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05068286 = queryNorm
            0.3746787 = fieldWeight in 701, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=701)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Content

Vgl.: http%3A%2F%2Fdigbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de%2Fvolltexte%2Fdocuments%2F1627&ei=tAtYUYrBNoHKtQb3l4GYBw&usg=AFQjCNHeaxKkKU3-u54LWxMNYGXaaDLCGw&sig2=8WykXWQoDKjDSdGtAakH2Q&bvm=bv.44442042,d.Yms.

0.016973633 = product of:
  0.050920896 = sum of:
    0.050920896 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1337) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050920896 = score(doc=1337,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19731061 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05068286 = queryNorm
        0.2580748 = fieldWeight in 1337, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1337)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

In this article, we describe the development of an extension to the Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS) to accommodate the needs of vocabulary development applications (VDA) managing metadata schemes and requiring close tracking of change to both those schemes and their member concepts. We take a neopragmatic epistemic stance in asserting the need for an entity in SKOS modeling to mediate between the abstract concept and the concrete scheme. While the SKOS model sufficiently describes entities for modeling the current state of a scheme in support of indexing and search on the Semantic Web, it lacks the expressive power to serve the needs of VDA needing to maintain scheme historical continuity. We demonstrate preliminarily that conceptualizations drawn from empirical work in modeling entities in the bibliographic universe, such as works, texts, and exemplars, can provide the basis for SKOS extension in ways that support more rigorous demands of capturing concept evolution in VDA.

0.016973633 = product of:
  0.050920896 = sum of:
    0.050920896 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1526) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050920896 = score(doc=1526,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19731061 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05068286 = queryNorm
        0.2580748 = fieldWeight in 1526, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1526)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

How information resources can be meaningfully related has been addressed in contexts from bibliographic entries to hyperlinks and, more recently, linked data. The genre structure and relationships among genre structure constituents shed new light on organizing information by purpose or function. This study examines the relationships among a set of functional units previously constructed in a taxonomy, each of which is a chunk of information embedded in a document and is distinct in terms of its communicative function. Through a card-sort study, relationships among functional units were identified with regard to their occurrence and function. The findings suggest that a group of functional units can be identified, collocated, and navigated by particular relationships. Understanding how functional units are related to each other is significant in linking information pieces in documents to support finding, aggregating, and navigating information in a distributed information environment.

0.016973633 = product of:
  0.050920896 = sum of:
    0.050920896 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1904) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050920896 = score(doc=1904,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19731061 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05068286 = queryNorm
        0.2580748 = fieldWeight in 1904, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1904)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Libraries and museums developed rules for the description of their collections prior to formalizing the underlying conceptualization reflected in such rules. That formalizing process took place in the 1990s and resulted in two independent conceptual models: FRBR for bibliographic information (published in 1998), and CIDOC CRM for museum information (developed from 1996 on, and issued as ISO standard 21127 in 2006). An international working group was formed in 2003 with the purpose of harmonizing these two models. The resulting model, FRBROO, was published in 2009. It is an extension to CIDOC CRM, using the formalism in which the former is written. It adds to FRBR the dynamic aspects of CIDOC CRM, and a number of refinements (e.g. in the definitions of Work and Manifestation). Some modifications were made in CIDOC CRM as well. FRBROO was developed with Semantic Web technologies in mind, and lends itself well to the Linked Data environment; but will it be used in that context?

0.016022598 = product of:
  0.048067793 = sum of:
    0.048067793 = product of:
      0.09613559 = sum of:
        0.09613559 = weight(_text_:22 in 4643) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09613559 = score(doc=4643,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17748274 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05068286 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4643, 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=4643)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 9.2007 15:41:14

0.014144694 = product of:
  0.04243408 = sum of:
    0.04243408 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 4245) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04243408 = score(doc=4245,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19731061 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05068286 = queryNorm
        0.21506234 = fieldWeight in 4245, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4245)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to use ideas drawn from two founders of American pragmatism, William James and Charles Sanders Peirce, in order to propose a philosophical foundation that supports the value of collaborative tagging and reinforces the structure and goals of the Semantic Web. Design/methodology/approach The study employs a close analysis of key literature by James and Peirce to answer recent calls for a philosophy of the Web and to respond to research in the LIS literature that has assessed the value and limitations of folksonomy. Moreover, pragmatic views are applied to illustrate the relationships among collaborative tagging, linked data, and the Semantic Web. Findings With a philosophical foundation in place, the study highlights the value of the minority tags that fall within the so-called "long tail" of the power law graph, and the importance of granting sufficient time for the full value of folksonomy to be revealed. The discussion goes further to explore how "collaborative tagging" could evolve into "collaborative knowledge" in the form of linked data. Specifically, Peirce's triadic architectonic is shown to foster an understanding of the construction of linked data through the functional requirements for bibliographic records entity-relation model and resource description framework triples, and James's image of the multiverse anticipates the goals Tim Berners-Lee has articulated for the Semantic Web. Originality/value This study is unique in using Jamesian and Peircean thinking to argue for the value of folksonomy and to suggest implications for the Semantic Web.

0.014144694 = product of:
  0.04243408 = sum of:
    0.04243408 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5478) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04243408 = score(doc=5478,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19731061 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05068286 = queryNorm
        0.21506234 = fieldWeight in 5478, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5478)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This exploratory study examined Linked Data (LD) schemas/ontologies and data models proposed or in use by libraries around the world using MAchine Readable Cataloging (MARC) as a basis for comparison of the scope and extensibility of these potential new standards. The researchers selected 14 libraries from national libraries, academic libraries, government libraries, public libraries, multi-national libraries, and cultural heritage centers currently developing Library Linked Data (LLD) schemas. The choices of models, schemas, and elements used in each library's LD can create interoperability issues for LD services because of substantial differences between schemas and data models evolving via local decisions. The researchers observed that a wide variety of vocabularies and ontologies were used for LLD including common web schemas such as Dublin Core (DC)/DCTerms, Schema.org and Resource Description Framework (RDF), as well as deprecated schemas such as MarcOnt and rdagroup1elements. A sharp divide existed as well between LLD schemas using variations of the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) data model and those with different data models or even with no listed data model. Libraries worldwide are not using the same elements or even the same ontologies, schemas and data models to describe the same materials using the same general concepts.