Search (171 results, page 1 of 9)

0.30921268 = product of:
  0.61842537 = sum of:
    0.61842537 = sum of:
      0.578812 = weight(_text_:crm in 1652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.578812 = score(doc=1652,freq=16.0), product of:
          0.38785186 = queryWeight, product of:
            7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0487299 = queryNorm
          1.4923533 = fieldWeight in 1652, product of:
            4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
              16.0 = termFreq=16.0
            7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1652)
      0.03961337 = weight(_text_:22 in 1652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03961337 = score(doc=1652,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1706438 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0487299 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1652, 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=1652)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This document is the formal definition of the CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model ("CRM"), a formal ontology intended to facilitate the integration, mediation and interchange of heterogeneous cultural heritage information. The CRM is the culmination of more than a decade of standards development work by the International Committee for Documentation (CIDOC) of the International Council of Museums (ICOM). Work on the CRM itself began in 1996 under the auspices of the ICOM-CIDOC Documentation Standards Working Group. Since 2000, development of the CRM has been officially delegated by ICOM-CIDOC to the CIDOC CRM Special Interest Group, which collaborates with the ISO working group ISO/TC46/SC4/WG9 to bring the CRM to the form and status of an International Standard.

Date

6. 8.2010 14:22:28

Issue

Version 3.4.9 - 30.11.2003. Produced by the ICOM/CIDOC Documentation Standards Group, continued by the CIDOC CRM Special Interest Group.

Object

CIDOC CRM

0.1364273 = product of:
  0.2728546 = sum of:
    0.2728546 = product of:
      0.5457092 = sum of:
        0.5457092 = weight(_text_:crm in 6319) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.5457092 = score(doc=6319,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.38785186 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0487299 = queryNorm
            1.4070041 = fieldWeight in 6319, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6319)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Object

CIDOC CRM

0.13481906 = product of:
  0.26963812 = sum of:
    0.26963812 = product of:
      0.53927624 = sum of:
        0.53927624 = weight(_text_:crm in 467) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.53927624 = score(doc=467,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.38785186 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0487299 = queryNorm
            1.390418 = fieldWeight in 467, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=467)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The CIDOC CRM provides an ontology for describing entities, properties and relationships appearing in cultural heritage (CH) documentation, history and archeology. CRM promotes shared understanding by providing an extensible semantic framework that any CH information can be mapped to. CRM data is usually represented in semantic web format (RDF) and comprises complex graphs of nodes and properties. An important question is how a user can search through such complex graphs, since the number of possible combinations is staggering. One approach "compresses" the semantic network by mapping many CRM entity classes to a few "Fundamental Concepts" (FC), and mapping whole networks of CRM properties to fewer "Fundamental Relations" (FR). These FC and FRs serve as a "search index" over the CRM semantic web and allow the user to use a simpler query vocabulary. We describe an implementation of CRM FR Search based on OWLIM Rules, done as part of the ResearchSpace (RS) project. We describe the technical details, problems and difficulties encountered, benefits and disadvantages of using OWLIM rules, and preliminary performance results. We provide implementation experience that can be valuable for further implementation, definition and maintenance of CRM FRs.

Object

CIDOC CRM

0.11279773 = product of:
  0.22559546 = sum of:
    0.22559546 = product of:
      0.45119092 = sum of:
        0.45119092 = weight(_text_:crm in 3743) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.45119092 = score(doc=3743,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.38785186 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0487299 = queryNorm
            1.1633073 = fieldWeight in 3743, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3743)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In 2008 the FRBR/CRM Harmonisation Working Group has achieved a major milestone: a complete version of the object-oriented definition of FRBR (FRBRoo) was released for comment. After a brief overview of the history and context of the Working Group, this paper focuses on the primary contributions resulting from this work. - FRBRoo is a self-contained document which expresses the concepts of FRBR using the objectoriented methodology and framework of CIDOC CRM. It is an alternative view on library conceptualisation for a different purpose, not a replacement for FRBR. - This 'translation' process presented an opportunity to verify and confirm FRBR's internal consistency. - FRBRoo offers a common view of library and museum documentation as two kinds of information from memory institutions. Such a common view is necessary to provide interoperable information systems for all users interested in accessing common or related content. - The analysis provided an opportunity for mutual enrichment of FRBR and CIDOC CRM. Examples include: - - Addition of the modelling of time and events to FRBR, which can be seen in its application to the publishing process - - Clarification of the manifestation entity - - Explicit modelling of performances and recordings in FRBR - - Adding the work entity to CRM - - Adding the identifier assignment process to CRM. - Producing a formalisation which is more suited for implementation with object-oriented tools, and which facilitates the testing and adoption of FRBR concepts in implementations with different functional specifications and in different environments.

Object

FRBR/CRM
Cidoc CRM

0.08861213 = product of:
  0.17722426 = sum of:
    0.17722426 = product of:
      0.35444853 = sum of:
        0.35444853 = weight(_text_:crm in 2247) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.35444853 = score(doc=2247,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.38785186 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0487299 = queryNorm
            0.91387606 = fieldWeight in 2247, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2247)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The theoretical difficulty underlying gazetteers and time - period thesauri is generally overlooked. Practice demands that they are detailed, exhaustive and universal, but a dumb use may lead to paradoxes of traveling backwards in time, and shamanic - style bi-location. As Zeno's paradox of Achilles and the tortoise, these however suggest a solution that resolves the issues by addressing them from a different perspective. After surveying the most popular among such lists, this presentation will try to provide a theoretical basis by embedding them in 4-dimensional space - time and discretizing their granularity. This will allow relating them to CIDOC CRM, and some examples of mapping will be discussed.

Object

CIDOC CRM

0.07626518 = product of:
  0.15253036 = sum of:
    0.15253036 = product of:
      0.3050607 = sum of:
        0.3050607 = weight(_text_:crm in 3965) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.3050607 = score(doc=3965,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.38785186 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0487299 = queryNorm
            0.78653926 = fieldWeight in 3965, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3965)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This paper describes recent initiatives to make standard library metadata models and structures available to the Semantic Web, including IFLA standards such as Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR), Functional Requirements for Authority Data (FRAD), and International Standard Bibliographic Description (ISBD) along with the infrastructure that supports them. The FRBR Review Group is currently developing representations of FRAD and the entityrelationship model of FRBR in resource description framework (RDF) applications, using a combination of RDF, RDF Schema (RDFS), Simple Knowledge Organisation System (SKOS) and Web Ontology Language (OWL), cross-relating both models where appropriate. The ISBD/XML Task Group is investigating the representation of ISBD in RDF. The IFLA Namespaces project is developing an administrative and technical infrastructure to support such initiatives and encourage uptake of standards by other agencies. The paper describes similar initiatives with related external standards such as RDA - resource description and access, REICAT (the new Italian cataloguing rules) and CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model (CRM). The DCMI RDA Task Group is working with the Joint Steering Committee for RDA to develop Semantic Web representations of RDA structural elements, which are aligned with FRBR and FRAD, and controlled metadata content vocabularies. REICAT is also based on FRBR, and an object-oriented version of FRBR has been integrated with CRM, which itself has an RDF representation. CRM was initially based on the metadata needs of the museum community, and is now seeking extension to the archives community with the eventual aim of developing a model common to the main cultural information domains of archives, libraries and museums. The Vocabulary Mapping Framework (VMF) project has developed a Semantic Web tool to automatically generate mappings between metadata models from the information communities, including publishers. The tool is based on several standards, including CRM, FRAD, FRBR, MARC21 and RDA.

Object

CIDOC CRM

0.0723515 = product of:
  0.144703 = sum of:
    0.144703 = product of:
      0.289406 = sum of:
        0.289406 = weight(_text_:crm in 1662) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.289406 = score(doc=1662,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.38785186 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0487299 = queryNorm
            0.74617666 = fieldWeight in 1662, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1662)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Object

CIDOC CRM

0.064496666 = product of:
  0.12899333 = sum of:
    0.12899333 = product of:
      0.38698 = sum of:
        0.38698 = weight(_text_:3a in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.38698 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.41313264 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0487299 = queryNorm
            0.93669677 = fieldWeight in 1826, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1826)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CDQQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdigbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de%2Fvolltexte%2Fdocuments%2F3131107&ei=HzFWVYvGMsiNsgGTyoFI&usg=AFQjCNE2FHUeR9oQTQlNC4TPedv4Mo3DaQ&sig2=Rlzpr7a3BLZZkqZCXXN_IA&bvm=bv.93564037,d.bGg&cad=rja

0.05968694 = product of:
  0.11937388 = sum of:
    0.11937388 = product of:
      0.23874776 = sum of:
        0.23874776 = weight(_text_:crm in 5179) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.23874776 = score(doc=5179,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.38785186 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0487299 = queryNorm
            0.6155643 = fieldWeight in 5179, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5179)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Object

CIDOC CRM

0.051597334 = product of:
  0.10319467 = sum of:
    0.10319467 = product of:
      0.309584 = sum of:
        0.309584 = weight(_text_:3a in 230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.309584 = score(doc=230,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.41313264 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0487299 = queryNorm
            0.7493574 = fieldWeight in 230, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=230)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

https%3A%2F%2Ftannerlectures.utah.edu%2F_documents%2Fa-to-z%2Fp%2Fpopper80.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3f4QRTEH-OEBmoYr2J_c7H

0.05116023 = product of:
  0.10232046 = sum of:
    0.10232046 = product of:
      0.20464092 = sum of:
        0.20464092 = weight(_text_:crm in 4105) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.20464092 = score(doc=4105,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.38785186 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0487299 = queryNorm
            0.5276265 = fieldWeight in 4105, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4105)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The Drawings of The Florentine Painters project created the first online database of Florentine Renaissance drawings by applying Linked Open Data (LOD) techniques to a foundational text of the same name, first published by Bernard Berenson in 1903 (revised and expanded editions, 1938 and 1961). The goal was to make Berenson's catalog information-still an essential information resource today-available in a machine-readable format, allowing researchers to access the source content through open data services. This paper provides a technical overview of the methods and processes applied in the conversion of Berenson's catalog to LOD using the CIDOC-CRM ontology; it also discusses the different phases of the project, focusing on the challenges and issues of data transformation and publishing. The project was funded by the Samuel H. Kress Foundation and organized by Villa I Tatti, The Harvard University Center for Italian Renaissance Studies. Catalog: http://florentinedrawings.itatti.harvard.edu. Data Endpoint: http://data.itatti.harvard.edu.

0.05116023 = product of:
  0.10232046 = sum of:
    0.10232046 = product of:
      0.20464092 = sum of:
        0.20464092 = weight(_text_:crm in 5668) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.20464092 = score(doc=5668,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.38785186 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0487299 = queryNorm
            0.5276265 = fieldWeight in 5668, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5668)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Es liegt in der Natur des Menschen, Erfahrungen und Ideen in Wort und Schrift mit anderen teilen zu wollen. So produzieren wir jeden Tag gigantische Mengen an Texten, die in digitaler Form geteilt und abgelegt werden. The Radicati Group schätzt, dass 2017 täglich 269 Milliarden E-Mails versendet und empfangen werden. Hinzu kommen größtenteils unstrukturierte Daten wie Soziale Medien, Presse, Websites und firmeninterne Systeme, beispielsweise in Form von CRM-Software oder PDF-Dokumenten. Der weltweite Bestand an unstrukturierten Daten wächst so rasant, dass es kaum möglich ist, seinen Umfang zu quantifizieren. Der Versuch, eine belastbare Zahl zu recherchieren, führt unweigerlich zu diversen Artikeln, die den Anteil unstrukturierter Texte am gesamten Datenbestand auf 80% schätzen. Auch wenn nicht mehr einwandfrei nachvollziehbar ist, woher diese Zahl stammt, kann bei kritischer Reflexion unseres Tagesablaufs kaum bezweifelt werden, dass diese Daten von großer wirtschaftlicher Relevanz sind.

0.04263353 = product of:
  0.08526706 = sum of:
    0.08526706 = product of:
      0.17053412 = sum of:
        0.17053412 = weight(_text_:crm in 3963) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.17053412 = score(doc=3963,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.38785186 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0487299 = queryNorm
            0.4396888 = fieldWeight in 3963, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.9592175 = idf(docFreq=41, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3963)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Die fortgesetzte Entwicklung des bibliographischen Datenmodells FRBROO steht auf der Agenda des Strategischen Plans der IFLA Cataloguing Section. Als Teil des CIDOC Conceptual Reference Models (CIDOC CRM; ISO 21127:2006, letzte Version: v.5.0.2.) können damit verschieden strukturierte Informationen aus dem Bereich des kulturellen Erbes integriert und ausgetauscht werden; durch FRBROO werden bibliographische Informationen eingebunden. Aufgrund sichtbarer Veränderungen in der Publikationspraxis sind die bisherigen Bibliothekskataloge mit ihrer bibliographischen Fixierung auf das Buch als zentrales zu erschließendes Element nicht mehr zeitgemäß. Eine umfassende Erschließung des kulturellen Erbes gemeinsam mit Museen und Archiven und deren "Objekten" und damit eine ontologisch fundierte Abbildung der in naher Zukunft komplett digital vorliegenden publikatorischen Vielfalt in kollaborativ gepflegten Katalogen wissenschaftlicher Bibliotheken gelingt nur, wenn zum einen der einzelne Text als "bibliographisches Objekt", was sowohl historische Quellen, fiktionale Werke als auch wissenschaftliche Aufsätze umfasst, formal und sachlich erschlossen wird und zum anderen das Ereignis als Ausgangspunkt der Erschließungsarbeit betrachtet wird. Zwei Folgerungen ergeben sich daraus: 1) Die semantischen Ebenen der Wissensrepräsentation nach Erwin Panofsky sollten um eine vierte Ebene erweitert werden, die als "acrossness" bezeichnet wird. 2) Die Aufgabe des wissenschaftlichen Bibliothekars sollte in einer intellektuellen Verwaltung der Neuerscheinungen, aber auch einer intellektuellen Durchdringung des eigenen Fachgebietes bestehen.

0.032248333 = product of:
  0.064496666 = sum of:
    0.064496666 = product of:
      0.19349 = sum of:
        0.19349 = weight(_text_:3a in 4388) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.19349 = score(doc=4388,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.41313264 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0487299 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 4388, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4388)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Vgl. unter: https://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwizweHljdbcAhVS16QKHXcFD9QQFjABegQICRAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchgate.net%2Fpublication%2F271200105_Die_Autonomie_des_Menschen_und_der_Maschine_-_gegenwartige_Definitionen_von_Autonomie_zwischen_philosophischem_Hintergrund_und_technologischer_Umsetzbarkeit_Redigierte_Version_der_Magisterarbeit_Karls&usg=AOvVaw06orrdJmFF2xbCCp_hL26q.

0.032248333 = product of:
  0.064496666 = sum of:
    0.064496666 = product of:
      0.19349 = sum of:
        0.19349 = weight(_text_:3a in 5669) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.19349 = score(doc=5669,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.41313264 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0487299 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 5669, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5669)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

"Die Englischsprachige Wikipedia verfügt jetzt über mehr als 6 Millionen Artikel. An zweiter Stelle kommt die deutschsprachige Wikipedia mit 2.3 Millionen Artikeln, an dritter Stelle steht die französischsprachige Wikipedia mit 2.1 Millionen Artikeln (via Researchbuzz: Firehose <https://rbfirehose.com/2020/01/24/techcrunch-wikipedia-now-has-more-than-6-million-articles-in-english/> und Techcrunch <https://techcrunch.com/2020/01/23/wikipedia-english-six-million-articles/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Techcrunch+%28TechCrunch%29&guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly9yYmZpcmVob3NlLmNvbS8yMDIwLzAxLzI0L3RlY2hjcnVuY2gtd2lraXBlZGlhLW5vdy1oYXMtbW9yZS10aGFuLTYtbWlsbGlvbi1hcnRpY2xlcy1pbi1lbmdsaXNoLw&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAK0zHfjdDZ_spFZBF_z-zDjtL5iWvuKDumFTzm4HvQzkUfE2pLXQzGS6FGB_y-VISdMEsUSvkNsg2U_NWQ4lwWSvOo3jvXo1I3GtgHpP8exukVxYAnn5mJspqX50VHIWFADHhs5AerkRn3hMRtf_R3F1qmEbo8EROZXp328HMC-o>). 250120 via digithek ch = #fineBlog s.a.: Angesichts der Veröffentlichung des 6-millionsten Artikels vergangene Woche in der englischsprachigen Wikipedia hat die Community-Zeitungsseite "Wikipedia Signpost" ein Moratorium bei der Veröffentlichung von Unternehmensartikeln gefordert. Das sei kein Vorwurf gegen die Wikimedia Foundation, aber die derzeitigen Maßnahmen, um die Enzyklopädie gegen missbräuchliches undeklariertes Paid Editing zu schützen, funktionierten ganz klar nicht. *"Da die ehrenamtlichen Autoren derzeit von Werbung in Gestalt von Wikipedia-Artikeln überwältigt werden, und da die WMF nicht in der Lage zu sein scheint, dem irgendetwas entgegenzusetzen, wäre der einzige gangbare Weg für die Autoren, fürs erste die Neuanlage von Artikeln über Unternehmen zu untersagen"*, schreibt der Benutzer Smallbones in seinem Editorial <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2020-01-27/From_the_editor> zur heutigen Ausgabe."

0.026408914 = product of:
  0.05281783 = sum of:
    0.05281783 = product of:
      0.10563566 = sum of:
        0.10563566 = weight(_text_:22 in 5449) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10563566 = score(doc=5449,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1706438 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0487299 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 5449, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5449)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 2.1997 19:26:34

0.026408914 = product of:
  0.05281783 = sum of:
    0.05281783 = product of:
      0.10563566 = sum of:
        0.10563566 = weight(_text_:22 in 5837) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10563566 = score(doc=5837,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1706438 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0487299 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 5837, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5837)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

30.11.1996 13:22:37

0.026408914 = product of:
  0.05281783 = sum of:
    0.05281783 = product of:
      0.10563566 = sum of:
        0.10563566 = weight(_text_:22 in 4085) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10563566 = score(doc=4085,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1706438 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0487299 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 4085, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4085)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

7.11.1999 18:22:39

0.025835307 = product of:
  0.051670615 = sum of:
    0.051670615 = product of:
      0.10334123 = sum of:
        0.10334123 = weight(_text_:22 in 1936) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10334123 = score(doc=1936,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.1706438 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0487299 = queryNorm
            0.6055961 = fieldWeight in 1936, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1936)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Dewey Decimal Classification and Relative Index, Edition 22 (DDC 22) will be issued simultaneously in print and web versions in July 2003. The new edition is the first full print update to the Dewey Decimal Classification system in seven years-it includes several significant updates and many new numbers and topics. DDC 22 also features some fundamental structural changes that have been introduced with the goals of promoting classifier efficiency and improving the DDC for use in a variety of applications in the web environment. Most importantly, the content of the new edition has been shaped by the needs and recommendations of Dewey users around the world. The worldwide user community has an important role in shaping the future of the DDC.

Object

DDC-22

0.023342403 = product of:
  0.046684805 = sum of:
    0.046684805 = product of:
      0.09336961 = sum of:
        0.09336961 = weight(_text_:22 in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09336961 = score(doc=3925,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1706438 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0487299 = queryNorm
            0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 3925, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3925)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 7.2006 15:22:28