Search (163 results, page 1 of 9)

0.117747255 = product of:
  0.15699634 = sum of:
    0.019420752 = weight(_text_:information in 5232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019420752 = score(doc=5232,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 5232, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5232)
    0.088519044 = weight(_text_:standards in 5232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.088519044 = score(doc=5232,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.39394283 = fieldWeight in 5232, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5232)
    0.049056537 = product of:
      0.098113075 = sum of:
        0.098113075 = weight(_text_:organization in 5232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.098113075 = score(doc=5232,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.5458315 = fieldWeight in 5232, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5232)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)

Abstract

Interoperability refers to the ability of two or more systems or components to exchange information and to use the information that has been exchanged. This article presents the major viewpoints of interoperability, with the focus on semantic interoperability. It discusses the approaches to achieving interoperability as demonstrated in standards and best practices, projects, and products in the broad domain of knowledge organization.

Series

Reviews of concepts in knowledge organization

Source

Knowledge organization. 46(2019) no.2, S.122-146

0.10573533 = product of:
  0.14098044 = sum of:
    0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 5993) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01029941 = score(doc=5993,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 5993, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5993)
    0.093888626 = weight(_text_:standards in 5993) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.093888626 = score(doc=5993,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.41783947 = fieldWeight in 5993, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5993)
    0.036792405 = product of:
      0.07358481 = sum of:
        0.07358481 = weight(_text_:organization in 5993) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07358481 = score(doc=5993,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.40937364 = fieldWeight in 5993, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5993)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)

Abstract

The lack of standardization in the production, organization and dissemination of information in documentation centers and institutions alike, as a result from the digitization of collections and their availability on the internet has called for integration efforts. The sheer availability of multimedia content has fostered the development of many distinct and, most of the time, independent metadata standards for its description. This study aims at presenting and comparing the existing standards of metadata, vocabularies and ontologies for multimedia annotation and also tries to offer a synthetic overview of its main strengths and weaknesses, aiding efforts for semantic integration and enhancing the findability of available multimedia resources on the web. We also aim at unveiling the characteristics that could, should and are perhaps not being highlighted in the characterization of multimedia resources.

Source

Knowledge organization. 47(2020) no.4, S.300-319

0.08959526 = product of:
  0.119460344 = sum of:
    0.02303018 = weight(_text_:information in 1686) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02303018 = score(doc=1686,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.2602176 = fieldWeight in 1686, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1686)
    0.066389285 = weight(_text_:standards in 1686) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.066389285 = score(doc=1686,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.29545712 = fieldWeight in 1686, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1686)
    0.030040871 = product of:
      0.060081743 = sum of:
        0.060081743 = weight(_text_:organization in 1686) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.060081743 = score(doc=1686,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.33425218 = fieldWeight in 1686, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1686)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)

Abstract

Since several years it has been observed that information offered by different knowledge producing institutions on the internet is more and more interlinked. This tendency will increase, because the fragmented information offers on the internet make the retrieval of information difficult as even impossible. At the same time the quantity of information offered on the internet grows exponentially in Europe - and elsewhere - due to many digitization projects. Insofar as funding institutions base the acceptance of projects on the observation of certain documentation standards the knowledge created will be retrievable and will remain so for a longer time. Otherwise the retrieval of information will become a matter of chance due to the limits of fragmented, knowledge producing social groups.

Source

Kompatibilität, Medien und Ethik in der Wissensorganisation - Compatibility, Media and Ethics in Knowledge Organization: Proceedings der 10. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation Wien, 3.-5. Juli 2006 - Proceedings of the 10th Conference of the German Section of the International Society of Knowledge Organization Vienna, 3-5 July 2006. Ed.: H.P. Ohly, S. Netscher u. K. Mitgutsch

0.08299618 = product of:
  0.11066157 = sum of:
    0.02303018 = weight(_text_:information in 3393) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02303018 = score(doc=3393,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.2602176 = fieldWeight in 3393, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3393)
    0.066389285 = weight(_text_:standards in 3393) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.066389285 = score(doc=3393,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.29545712 = fieldWeight in 3393, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3393)
    0.021242103 = product of:
      0.042484205 = sum of:
        0.042484205 = weight(_text_:organization in 3393) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042484205 = score(doc=3393,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.23635197 = fieldWeight in 3393, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3393)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)

Abstract

Digital Libraries currently face the challenge of integrating many different types of research information (e.g. publications, primary data, expert's profiles, institutional profiles, project information etc.) according to their scientific users' needs. To date no general, integrated model for knowledge organization and retrieval in Digital Libraries exists. This causes the problem of structural and semantic heterogeneity due to the wide range of metadata standards, indexing vocabularies and indexing approaches used for different types of information. The research presented in this paper focuses on areas in which activities are being undertaken in the field of Digital Libraries in order to treat semantic interoperability problems. We present a model for the integrated retrieval of factual and textual data which combines multiple approaches to semantic interoperability und sets them into context. Embedded in the research cycle, traditional content indexing methods for publications meet the newer, but rarely used ontology-based approaches which seem to be better suited for representing complex information like the one contained in survey data. The benefits of our model are (1) easy re-use of available knowledge organisation systems and (2) reduced efforts for domain modelling with ontologies.

Theme

Information Gateway

0.08048738 = product of:
  0.16097476 = sum of:
    0.014865918 = weight(_text_:information in 1678) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014865918 = score(doc=1678,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 1678, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1678)
    0.14610884 = sum of:
      0.111955725 = weight(_text_:organization in 1678) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.111955725 = score(doc=1678,freq=20.0), product of:
          0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050415643 = queryNorm
          0.6228422 = fieldWeight in 1678, product of:
            4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
              20.0 = termFreq=20.0
            3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1678)
      0.03415312 = weight(_text_:22 in 1678) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03415312 = score(doc=1678,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050415643 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1678, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1678)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

A case study in compatibility and heterogeneity of knowledge organization (KO) systems and processes is presented. It is based in the experience of the author in the field of information for consumer protection, a good example of the emerging transdisciplinary applied social sciences. The activities and knowledge organization problems and solutions of the Aragonian Consumers' Information and Documentation Centre are described and analyzed. Six assertions can be concluded: a) heterogeneity and compatibility are certainly an inherent problem in knowledge organization and also in practical domains; b) knowledge organization is also a social task, not only a lögical one; c) knowledge organization is affected by economical and efficiency considerations; d) knowledge organization is at the heart of Knowledge Management; e) identifying and maintaining the focus in interdisciplinary fields is a must; f the different knowledge organization tools of a institution must be considered as an integrated system, pursuing a unifying model.

Date

16. 3.2008 18:22:50

Source

Kompatibilität, Medien und Ethik in der Wissensorganisation - Compatibility, Media and Ethics in Knowledge Organization: Proceedings der 10. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation Wien, 3.-5. Juli 2006 - Proceedings of the 10th Conference of the German Section of the International Society of Knowledge Organization Vienna, 3-5 July 2006. Ed.: H.P. Ohly, S. Netscher u. K. Mitgutsch

0.06410737 = product of:
  0.085476495 = sum of:
    0.006007989 = weight(_text_:information in 772) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006007989 = score(doc=772,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.06788416 = fieldWeight in 772, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=772)
    0.06707728 = weight(_text_:standards in 772) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06707728 = score(doc=772,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.29851896 = fieldWeight in 772, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=772)
    0.012391226 = product of:
      0.024782453 = sum of:
        0.024782453 = weight(_text_:organization in 772) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024782453 = score(doc=772,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.13787198 = fieldWeight in 772, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=772)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)

Content

Der vollständige Titel von Teil 2 lautet "Information and documentation - Thesauri and interoperability with other vocabularies - Teil 2: Interoperability with other vocabularies". Wichtige Themen, die der Standard behandelt, sind Strukturmodelle für das Mapping, Richtlinien für Mappingtypen und der Umgang mit Präkombination, die besonders bei Klassifikationen, Taxonomien und Schlagwortsystemen vorkommt. Das primäre Augenmerk von ISO 25964 gilt den Thesauri, und mit Ausnahme von Terminologien existieren keine vergleichbaren Standards für die anderen Vokabulartypen. Statt zu versuchen, diese normativ darzustellen, behandelt Teil 2 ausschließlich die Interoperabilität zwischen ihnen und den Thesauri. Die Kapitel für die einzelnen Vokabulartypen decken jeweils folgende Sachverhalte ab: - Schlüsseleigenschaften des Vokabulars (deskriptiv, nicht normativ) - Semantische Komponenten/Beziehungen (deskriptiv, nicht normativ) Sofern anwendbar, Empfehlungen für das Mapping zwischen Vokabular und Thesaurus (normativ).
Im Fall von Ontologien, Terminologien und Synonymringen ist das Mapping in oder aus einem Thesaurus nicht immer nützlich. Hier sind andere Formen sich gegenseitig befruchtender Nutzung zu empfehlen. Dies gilt besonders für Ontologien, die im Kontext des Semantischen Web kombiniert mit Thesauri eingesetzt werden können. ISO 25964-2 zeigt die Unterschiede zwischen Thesauri und Ontologien auf und gibt Beispiele für die Möglichkeiten interoperabler Funktionen. Praktische Implementation und weiterführende Arbeiten Und was bedeutet dies für SKOS, dem W3C-Standard für die Veröffentlichung von Simple Knowledge Organization Systems im Web? Die Arbeitsgruppen von SKOS und ISO 25964 haben glücklicherweise eng zusammengearbeitet, was sich in einer guten Kompatibilität der beiden Standards äußert. Gemeinsam haben sie eine Tabelle erarbeitet, die die Übereinstimmungen zwischen den Datenmodellen von ISO 25964 und SKOS/SKOS-XL aufzeigt und nun beim ISO 25964-Sekretariat unter http://www.niso.org/schemas/iso25964/frei zugänglich ist. Die Tabelle ist formal kein Bestandteil der beiden Standards, aber von beiden abhängig. Das macht sie zu einem Beispiel für die Entwicklung praktischer Tools für das sich erweiternde Semantische Web durch die Gemeinschaft seiner Nutzer."

0.061206747 = product of:
  0.081608996 = sum of:
    0.008582841 = weight(_text_:information in 29) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008582841 = score(doc=29,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 29, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=29)
    0.0553244 = weight(_text_:standards in 29) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0553244 = score(doc=29,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.24621427 = fieldWeight in 29, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=29)
    0.017701752 = product of:
      0.035403505 = sum of:
        0.035403505 = weight(_text_:organization in 29) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035403505 = score(doc=29,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.19695997 = fieldWeight in 29, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=29)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)

Abstract

Der Artikel basiert auf einer Bachelorarbeit mit dem Titel "Terminologie Mapping: Grundlagen und aktuelle Standardisierung", die im Sommersemester 2011 an der Hochschule Darmstadt geschrieben wurde. Er befasst sich mit den Grundlagen des Terminologie Mappings, also der Erstellung von Querverbindungen zwischen verschiedenen kontrollierten Vokabularen und der Standardisierung der Mapping-Verfahren. Die Grundlagen sollen anhand der Erkenntnisse aus Doerrs zentraler Publikation aus dem Jahre 2001 (Doerr 2001) dargestellt werden. Darauf folgt ein Blick in den Bereich der Standardisierung, der gerade in den letzten Jahren eine starke Entwicklung durchlaufen hat, was dazu führt, dass immer mehr aktualisierte nationale und internationale Standards herausgegeben werden, die Terminologie Mapping in verschiedener Weise als Mittel zur Erlangung von Interoperabilität empfehlen. Ebenso soll das "Simple Knowledge Organization System" (SKOS), ein Standard des W3Cs zur Repräsentation von kontrollierten Vokabularen, thematisiert werden. Dieser hat das Ziel, kontrollierte Vokabulare im Semantic Web darzustellen. Obwohl sich bei der Modellierung von klassischen kontrollierten Vokabularen (überwiegend Thesauri) in SKOS noch einige Probleme abzeichnen, stellt dieser Standard einen wichtigen Schritt für kontrollierte Vokabulare aus der Fachinformation in das Semantic Web dar. Abschließend soll ein Fazit zur Standardisierung gezogen werden sowie ein Ausblick auf die Möglichkeiten der Einbindung von Terminologie Mapping im Semantic Web via SKOS geben werden.

Source

Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 63(2012) H.1, S.45-55

0.061206747 = product of:
  0.081608996 = sum of:
    0.008582841 = weight(_text_:information in 977) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008582841 = score(doc=977,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 977, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=977)
    0.0553244 = weight(_text_:standards in 977) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0553244 = score(doc=977,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.24621427 = fieldWeight in 977, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=977)
    0.017701752 = product of:
      0.035403505 = sum of:
        0.035403505 = weight(_text_:organization in 977) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035403505 = score(doc=977,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.19695997 = fieldWeight in 977, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=977)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)

Abstract

The research study as reported here is an attempt to explore the possibilities of an AI/ML-based semi-automated indexing system in a library setup to handle large volumes of documents. It uses the Python virtual environment to install and configure an open source AI environment (named Annif) to feed the LOD (Linked Open Data) dataset of Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) as a standard KOS (Knowledge Organisation System). The framework deployed the Turtle format of LCSH after cleaning the file with Skosify, applied an array of backend algorithms (namely TF-IDF, Omikuji, and NN-Ensemble) to measure relative performance, and selected Snowball as an analyser. The training of Annif was conducted with a large set of bibliographic records populated with subject descriptors (MARC tag 650$a) and indexed by trained LIS professionals. The training dataset is first treated with MarcEdit to export it in a format suitable for OpenRefine, and then in OpenRefine it undergoes many steps to produce a bibliographic record set suitable to train Annif. The framework, after training, has been tested with a bibliographic dataset to measure indexing efficiencies, and finally, the automated indexing framework is integrated with data wrangling software (OpenRefine) to produce suggested headings on a mass scale. The entire framework is based on open-source software, open datasets, and open standards.

Source

DESIDOC journal of library and information technology. 43(2023) no.1, S.45-54

0.057815526 = product of:
  0.11563105 = sum of:
    0.014565565 = weight(_text_:information in 1347) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014565565 = score(doc=1347,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 1347, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1347)
    0.10106549 = sum of:
      0.060081743 = weight(_text_:organization in 1347) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.060081743 = score(doc=1347,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050415643 = queryNorm
          0.33425218 = fieldWeight in 1347, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1347)
      0.04098374 = weight(_text_:22 in 1347) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04098374 = score(doc=1347,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050415643 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1347, 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=1347)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Terminology registries (TRs) are a crucial element of the infrastructure required for resource discovery services, digital libraries, Linked Data, and semantic interoperability generally. They can make the content of knowledge organization systems (KOS) available both for human and machine access. The paper describes the attributes and functionality for a TR, based on a review of published literature, existing TRs, and a survey of experts. A domain model based on user tasks is constructed and a set of core metadata elements for use in TRs is proposed. Ideally, the TR should allow searching as well as browsing for a KOS, matching a user's search while also providing information about existing terminology services, accessible to both humans and machines. The issues surrounding metadata for KOS are also discussed, together with the rationale for different aspects and the importance of a core set of KOS metadata for future machine-based access; a possible core set of metadata elements is proposed. This is dealt with in terms of practical experience and in relation to the Dublin Core Application Profile.

Date

22. 8.2014 17:12:54

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.9, S.1901-1916

0.05676322 = product of:
  0.11352644 = sum of:
    0.09582469 = weight(_text_:standards in 1908) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09582469 = score(doc=1908,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.42645568 = fieldWeight in 1908, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1908)
    0.017701752 = product of:
      0.035403505 = sum of:
        0.035403505 = weight(_text_:organization in 1908) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035403505 = score(doc=1908,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.19695997 = fieldWeight in 1908, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1908)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Purpose - To demonstrate that newer developments in the semantic web community, particularly those based on ontologies (simple knowledge organization system and others) mitigate common arguments from the digital library (DL) community against participation in the Semantic web. Design/methodology/approach - The approach is a semantic web discussion focusing on the weak structure of the Web and the lack of consideration given to the semantic content during indexing. Findings - The points criticised by the semantic web and ontology approaches are the same as those of the DL "Shell model approach" from the mid-1990s, with emphasis on the centrality of its heterogeneity components (used, for example, in vascoda). The Shell model argument began with the "invisible web", necessitating the restructuring of DL approaches. The conclusion is that both approaches fit well together and that the Shell model, with its semantic heterogeneity components, can be reformulated on the semantic web basis. Practical implications - A reinterpretation of the DL approaches of semantic heterogeneity and adapting to standards and tools supported by the W3C should be the best solution. It is therefore recommended that - although most of the semantic web standards are not technologically refined for commercial applications at present - all individual DL developments should be checked for their adaptability to the W3C standards of the semantic web. Originality/value - A unique conceptual analysis of the parallel developments emanating from the digital library and semantic web communities.

0.050532743 = product of:
  0.20213097 = sum of:
    0.20213097 = sum of:
      0.120163485 = weight(_text_:organization in 4786) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.120163485 = score(doc=4786,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050415643 = queryNorm
          0.66850436 = fieldWeight in 4786, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
            0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4786)
      0.08196748 = weight(_text_:22 in 4786) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08196748 = score(doc=4786,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050415643 = queryNorm
          0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 4786, 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=4786)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

Präsentation anlässlich: NKOS 2008 - Networked Knowledge Organization Systems, September 19th 2008 ECDL-Conference, Arhus.

Date

22. 9.2008 19:30:41

0.047971137 = product of:
  0.095942274 = sum of:
    0.07824052 = weight(_text_:standards in 4379) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07824052 = score(doc=4379,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.34819958 = fieldWeight in 4379, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4379)
    0.017701752 = product of:
      0.035403505 = sum of:
        0.035403505 = weight(_text_:organization in 4379) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035403505 = score(doc=4379,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.19695997 = fieldWeight in 4379, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4379)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

While support for subject searching has been traditionally advocated for in library catalogs, often in the form of a catalog objective to find everything that a library has on a certain topic, research has shown that subject access has not been satisfactory. Many existing online catalogs and discovery services do not seem to make good use of the intellectual effort invested into assigning controlled subject index terms and classes. For example, few support hierarchical browsing of classification schemes and other controlled vocabularies with hierarchical structures, few provide end-user-friendly options to choose a more specific concept to increase precision, a broader concept or related concepts to increase recall, to disambiguate homonyms, or to find which term is best used to name a concept. Optimum subject access in library catalogs and discovery services is analyzed from the perspective of earlier research as well as contemporary conceptual models and cataloguing codes. Eighteen proposed features of what this should entail in practice are drawn. In an exploratory qualitative study, the three most common discovery services used in Swedish academic libraries are analyzed against these features. In line with previous research, subject access in contemporary interfaces is demonstrated to less than optimal. This is in spite of the fact that individual collections have been indexed with controlled vocabularies and a significant number of controlled vocabularies have been mapped to each other and are available in interoperable standards. Strategic action is proposed to build research-informed (inter)national standards and guidelines.

Source

Knowledge organization. 45(2018) no.4, S.297-309

0.047684584 = product of:
  0.09536917 = sum of:
    0.066389285 = weight(_text_:standards in 4379) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.066389285 = score(doc=4379,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.29545712 = fieldWeight in 4379, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4379)
    0.028979883 = product of:
      0.057959765 = sum of:
        0.057959765 = weight(_text_:22 in 4379) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.057959765 = score(doc=4379,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 4379, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4379)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Am 29. und 30. Oktober 2009 fand in der Königlichen Bibliothek in Den Haag das zweite internationale UDC-Seminar zum Thema "Classification at a Crossroad" statt. Organisiert wurde diese Konferenz - wie auch die erste Konferenz dieser Art im Jahr 2007 - vom UDC-Konsortium (UDCC). Im Mittelpunkt der diesjährigen Veranstaltung stand die Erschließung des World Wide Web unter besserer Nutzung von Klassifikationen (im Besonderen natürlich der UDC), einschließlich benutzerfreundlicher Repräsentationen von Informationen und Wissen. Standards, neue Technologien und Dienste, semantische Suche und der multilinguale Zugriff spielten ebenfalls eine Rolle. 135 Teilnehmer aus 35 Ländern waren dazu nach Den Haag gekommen. Das Programm umfasste mit 22 Vorträgen aus 14 verschiedenen Ländern eine breite Palette, wobei Großbritannien mit fünf Beiträgen am stärksten vertreten war. Die Tagesschwerpunkte wurden an beiden Konferenztagen durch die Eröffnungsvorträge gesetzt, die dann in insgesamt sechs thematischen Sitzungen weiter vertieft wurden.

Date

22. 1.2010 15:06:54

0.04473507 = product of:
  0.08947014 = sum of:
    0.012015978 = weight(_text_:information in 4559) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012015978 = score(doc=4559,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 4559, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4559)
    0.077454165 = weight(_text_:standards in 4559) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.077454165 = score(doc=4559,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.34469998 = fieldWeight in 4559, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4559)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Die Interoperabilität von Metadaten ist eine wichtige Voraussetzung für das Generieren von Information und Wissen in einer vernetzten Welt. Aus diesem Grund entstehen seit Mitte der Neunziger Jahre verschiedene Standards mit dem Ziel, die Interoperabilität von Metadaten zu erhöhen. Genannt seien hier vor allem DCMES und DCAM, RDF und SKOS. Aufgabe von KIM ist es, diese Entwicklungen zu begleiten und in die deutschsprachige Community zu tragen. Dabei bietet KIM neben reinen Informationsangeboten (z. B. in Form von Übersetzungen, Vorträgen und Handreichungen) auch konkrete Unterstützung in Form von Schulungen und Beratungen an.

0.04473507 = product of:
  0.08947014 = sum of:
    0.012015978 = weight(_text_:information in 114) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012015978 = score(doc=114,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 114, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=114)
    0.077454165 = weight(_text_:standards in 114) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.077454165 = score(doc=114,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.34469998 = fieldWeight in 114, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=114)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Even though ontologies are widely being used to enable interoperability in information-rich endeavours, there is currently no united framework for ontology interoperability itself. Surprisingly little of the state of the art in modularity and structuring, e.g. in software engineering, has been applied to ontology engineering so far. However, application areas like Ambient Assisted Living (AAL), which require synchronization and orchestration of interoperable services, are in dire need of safe and secure ontology interoperability. OntoIOp (Ontology Integration and Interoperability), a new international standard proposed in ISO/TC 37/SC 3, aims at filling this gap.

Imprint

Seoul : Korean Agency for Technology and Standards

0.043279707 = product of:
  0.057706274 = sum of:
    0.006068985 = weight(_text_:information in 4315) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006068985 = score(doc=4315,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.068573356 = fieldWeight in 4315, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=4315)
    0.03912026 = weight(_text_:standards in 4315) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03912026 = score(doc=4315,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.17409979 = fieldWeight in 4315, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=4315)
    0.012517029 = product of:
      0.025034059 = sum of:
        0.025034059 = weight(_text_:organization in 4315) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025034059 = score(doc=4315,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.13927174 = fieldWeight in 4315, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=4315)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)

Content

"Am 19. und 20. Juli 2010 fand in der Fachhochschule Köln die internationale Tagung "Concepts in Context - Cologne Conference on Interoperability and Semantics in Knowledge Organization" statt. Ausgerichtet wurde sie mit finanzieller Unterstützung der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) vom Institut für Informationsmanagement (IIM) der Fachhochschule Köln in Kooperation mit der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek (DNB). Im Mittelpunkt der Veranstaltung standen Fragen der Modellierung von Interoperabilität und semantischen Informationen in der Wissensorganisation, die einen unmittelbaren thematischen Zusammenhang mit den am Institut für Informationsmanagement angesiedelten Projekten CrissCross und RESEDA aufweisen. Das Programm umfasste 11 Beiträge aus 5 verschiedenen Ländern sowohl zu praktischen als auch zu theoretischen Aspekten der Wissensorganisation unter besonderer Berücksichtigung moderner Technologien, aktueller Entwicklungen und zukunftsbezogener Perspektiven. Der erste Tag war als Abschlussworkshop für das CrissCross-Projekt konzipiert und bot in zwei Sessions neben einem umfassenden Überblick über das Projekt auch weitere Best-Practice-Beispiele für die Gestaltung von Interoperabilität vor allem im Rahmen von Ansätzen der Semantic-Web- und Linked-Data-Initiativen. Eine vertiefte Auseinandersetzung mit sich in der Entwicklung befindlichen oder auch erst kürzlich fertiggestellten Standards und Modellen der Interoperabilität und Wissensorganisation erfolgte am zweiten Tag, der mit einer Keynote von Dagobert Soergel von der University at Buffalo (USA) eröffnet wurde und in zwei weitere Sessions unterteilt war. Zu der Veranstaltung konnten Prof. Dr. Klaus-Dirk Schmitz, Leiter des Kölner Instituts für Informationsmanagement, sowie Ulrike Junger, Leiterin der Abteilung Sacherschließung der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek in Stellvertretung der Generaldirektorin, Dr. Elisabeth Niggemann, ca. 120 Teilnehmer aus insgesamt 16 Ländern begrüßen. Prof. Klaus-Dirk Schmitz stellte in seiner Eröffnungsrede die Fachhochschule Köln und insbesondere das Institut für Informationsmanagement vor und erörterte das Konferenzthema mit Beispielen aus Forschungsgebieten der Terminologiearbeit. Ulrike Junger ging auf die gelungene Zusammenarbeit zwischen der Fachhochschule Köln und der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek ein, die mit dem DFG-Projekt DDC Deutsch begonnen und in dem DFG-Projekt CrissCross eine Fortsetzung gefunden hatte. Eine Einführung in die spezifischen Konferenzinhalte gab schließlich Prof. Winfried Gödert, Leiter des RESEDA-Projekts sowie - seitens der Fachhochschule Köln - des CrissCross-Projekts.
Der zweite Tag begann mit einer Keynote von Dagobert Soergel von der University at Buffalo mit dem Thema Conceptual Foundations for Semantic Mapping and Semantic Search. Im Zentrum stand die Idee eines Hubs, einer semantischen Verbindungsstruktur in Form einer Kernklassifikation, die elementare Begriffe sowie semantische Relationen enthält und über die ein Mapping zwischen unterschiedlichen Wissensorganisationssystemen erfolgen soll. Die Methode wurde durch zahlreiche Beispiele veranschaulicht. Die erste Session des zweiten Tages war dem Thema Interoperabilität und Standardisierung gewidmet. Stella Dextre Clarke aus Großbritannien berichtete - ausgehend von den in zentralen Mappingprojekten erstellten Relationen zwischen Begriffen unterschiedlicher Dokumentationssprachen - über Herausforderungen und Fragestellungen bei der Entwicklung des neuen ISO-Standards 25964-2, der als Leitfaden zur Herstellung von Interoperabilität zwischen Thesauri und anderen Vokabularien fungieren soll. In dem Folgevortrag von Philipp Mayr vom GESIS Leipniz-Institut für Sozialwissenschaften wurd mit KoMoHe (Kompetenzzentrum Modellbildung und Heterogenitätsbehandlung) ein bereits abgeschlossenes Projekt vorgestellt, dessen Mehrwert für das Retrieval in heterogen erschlossenen Informationsräumen mittels eines Information-Retrieval-Tests bestätigt werden konnte. Unpräzise Trefferresultate motivierten indes zu dem Nachfolgeprojekt IRM (Value-Added Services for Information Retrieval), in dem Möglichkeiten von Suchexpansion und Re-Ranking untersucht werden.

0.04299237 = product of:
  0.08598474 = sum of:
    0.0553244 = weight(_text_:standards in 4814) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0553244 = score(doc=4814,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.24621427 = fieldWeight in 4814, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4814)
    0.030660335 = product of:
      0.06132067 = sum of:
        0.06132067 = weight(_text_:organization in 4814) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06132067 = score(doc=4814,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.34114468 = fieldWeight in 4814, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4814)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Ontologies are increasingly seen as a new type of knowledge organization system (KOS) besides traditional ones such as classification schemes or thesauri. Consequently, there are efforts to compare them with and map them to other KOS. This paper argues that only ontologies for reality representation are useful subjects of such comparisons and mappings. These ontologies are difficult to distinguish from other "data modelling" - types of ontology, since both can be represented through the popular Web Ontology Language (OWL). Data modelling ontologies such as Simple Knowledge Organization Systems (SKOS) are useful instruments for establishing interoperability between KOS in the sense of publishing and accessing data and data models in a uniform way as well as for relating them to each other. Discriminating these two understandings of ontologies particularly supports comparisons and mappings between traditional KOS and ontologies. In practice, such efforts are still impeded by the absence of standards or guidelines for vocabulary control in ontologies. Moreover, this paper emphasizes that methods for constructing and evaluating reality representation ontologies can be useful to re-engineer traditional KOS. This makes them become more interoperable in the sense of combinable, but also more useful in the sense of improving search expansion results and reusable for different purposes.

0.04221127 = product of:
  0.08442254 = sum of:
    0.014865918 = weight(_text_:information in 4066) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014865918 = score(doc=4066,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 4066, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4066)
    0.06955662 = sum of:
      0.035403505 = weight(_text_:organization in 4066) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035403505 = score(doc=4066,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050415643 = queryNorm
          0.19695997 = fieldWeight in 4066, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4066)
      0.03415312 = weight(_text_:22 in 4066) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03415312 = score(doc=4066,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050415643 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4066, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4066)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

The focus of this paper is the provision of terminology- and classification-based terminologies interoperability data via web services, initially using interoperability data based on the use of a Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) spine, but with an aim to explore other possibilities in time, including the use of other spines. The High-Level Thesaurus Project (HILT) Phase IV developed pilot web services based on SRW/U, SOAP, and SKOS to deliver machine-readable terminology and crossterminology mappings data likely to be useful to information services wishing to enhance their subject search or browse services. It also developed an associated toolkit to help information services technical staff to embed HILT-related functionality within service interfaces. Several UK information services have created illustrative user interface enhancements using HILT functionality and these will demonstrate what is possible. HILT currently has the following subject schemes mounted and available: DDC, CAB, GCMD, HASSET, IPSV, LCSH, MeSH, NMR, SCAS, UNESCO, and AAT. It also has high level mappings between some of these schemes and DDC and some deeper pilot mappings available.

Date

6. 1.2011 19:22:48

Source

Knowledge organization. 37(2010) no.4, S.280-286

0.040847298 = product of:
  0.081694596 = sum of:
    0.01213797 = weight(_text_:information in 2627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01213797 = score(doc=2627,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 2627, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2627)
    0.06955662 = sum of:
      0.035403505 = weight(_text_:organization in 2627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035403505 = score(doc=2627,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050415643 = queryNorm
          0.19695997 = fieldWeight in 2627, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2627)
      0.03415312 = weight(_text_:22 in 2627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03415312 = score(doc=2627,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050415643 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2627, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2627)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Knowledge organization systems (KOS), like thesauri and other controlled vocabularies, are used to provide subject access to information systems across the web. Due to the heterogeneity of these systems, mapping between vocabularies becomes crucial for retrieving relevant information. However, mapping thesauri is a laborious task, and thus big efforts are being made to automate the mapping process. This paper examines two mapping approaches involving the agricultural thesaurus AGROVOC, one machine-created and one human created. We are addressing the basic question "What are the pros and cons of human and automatic mapping and how can they complement each other?" By pointing out the difficulties in specific cases or groups of cases and grouping the sample into simple and difficult types of mappings, we show the limitations of current automatic methods and come up with some basic recommendations on what approach to use when.

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

0.040477425 = product of:
  0.08095485 = sum of:
    0.014565565 = weight(_text_:information in 2186) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014565565 = score(doc=2186,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 2186, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2186)
    0.066389285 = weight(_text_:standards in 2186) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.066389285 = score(doc=2186,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.29545712 = fieldWeight in 2186, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2186)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Topic Maps are a standardized modelling approach for the semantic annotation and description of WWW resources. They enable an improved search and navigational access on information objects stored in semi-structured information spaces like the WWW. However, the according standards ISO 13250 and XTM (XML Topic Maps) lack formal semantics, several questions concerning e.g. subclassing, inheritance or merging of topics are left open. The proposed TMUML meta model, directly derived from the well known UML meta model, is a meta model for Topic Maps which enables semantic constraints to be formulated in OCL (object constraint language) in order to answer such open questions and overcome possible inconsistencies in Topic Map repositories. We will examine the XTM merging conditions and show, in several examples, how the TMUML meta model enables semantic constraints for Topic Map merging to be formulated in OCL. Finally, we will show how the TM validation process, i.e., checking if a Topic Map is well formed, includes our merging conditions.