Search (90 results, page 1 of 5)

0.03800519 = product of:
  0.07601038 = sum of:
    0.07601038 = sum of:
      0.0054123 = weight(_text_:a in 4313) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0054123 = score(doc=4313,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 4313, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4313)
      0.07059808 = weight(_text_:22 in 4313) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07059808 = score(doc=4313,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 4313, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4313)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 6.2018 14:22:02

Source

http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/unternehmen/messenger-apps-wie-china-die-mobile-zukunft-erfindet-a-1071815.html

0.028787265 = product of:
  0.05757453 = sum of:
    0.05757453 = sum of:
      0.007654148 = weight(_text_:a in 3478) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.007654148 = score(doc=3478,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 3478, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3478)
      0.04992038 = weight(_text_:22 in 3478) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04992038 = score(doc=3478,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3478, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3478)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Final version now available! http://youtube.com/watch?v=NLlGopyXT_g http://mediatedcultures.net A higher quality version is available for download here: http://www.mediafire.com/?6duzg3zioyd. Please note that this is the second draft and the final version will not be available until late February after I review all comments and revise the video. Please return for a new download link at that time.

Date

5. 1.2008 19:22:48

0.028787265 = product of:
  0.05757453 = sum of:
    0.05757453 = sum of:
      0.007654148 = weight(_text_:a in 4314) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.007654148 = score(doc=4314,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 4314, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4314)
      0.04992038 = weight(_text_:22 in 4314) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04992038 = score(doc=4314,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4314, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4314)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 6.2018 14:29:46

Type

a

0.02496019 = product of:
  0.04992038 = sum of:
    0.04992038 = product of:
      0.09984076 = sum of:
        0.09984076 = weight(_text_:22 in 5837) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09984076 = score(doc=5837,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = 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

0.018529613 = product of:
  0.037059225 = sum of:
    0.037059225 = sum of:
      0.005858987 = weight(_text_:a in 4180) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.005858987 = score(doc=4180,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.11032722 = fieldWeight in 4180, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4180)
      0.03120024 = weight(_text_:22 in 4180) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03120024 = score(doc=4180,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4180, 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=4180)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

23. 3.2018 13:41:22

Footnote

Vgl. zum Hintergrund auch: https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/17/cambridge-analytica-facebook-influence-us-election; https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/18/us/cambridge-analytica-facebook-privacy-data.html; http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-tn-facebook-cambridge-analytica-sued-20180321-story.html; https://www.tagesschau.de/wirtschaft/facebook-cambridge-analytica-103.html; http://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/web/cambridge-analytica-der-eigentliche-skandal-liegt-im-system-facebook-kolumne-a-1199122.html; http://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/netzpolitik/cambridge-analytica-facebook-sieht-sich-im-datenskandal-als-opfer-a-1199095.html; https://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Datenskandal-um-Cambridge-Analytica-Facebook-sieht-sich-als-Opfer-3999922.html.

Type

a

0.01482369 = product of:
  0.02964738 = sum of:
    0.02964738 = sum of:
      0.0046871896 = weight(_text_:a in 1447) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0046871896 = score(doc=1447,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.088261776 = fieldWeight in 1447, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1447)
      0.02496019 = weight(_text_:22 in 1447) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02496019 = score(doc=1447,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1447, 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=1447)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The BAER Web Resources Group was charged in October 1999 with defining and describing the parameters of electronic resources that do not clearly belong to the categories being defined by the BAER Digital Group or the BAER Electronic Journals Group. After some difficulty identifying precisely which resources fell under the Group's charge, we finally named the following types of resources for our consideration: web sites, electronic texts, indexes, databases and abstracts, online reference resources, and networked and non-networked CD-ROMs. Electronic resources are a vast and growing collection that touch nearly every department within the Library. It is unrealistic to think one department can effectively administer all aspects of the collection. The Group then began to focus on the concern of bibliographic access to these varied resources, and to define parameters for handling or processing them within the Library. Some key elements became evident as the work progressed. * Selection process of resources to be acquired for the collection * Duplication of effort * Use of CORC * Resource Finder design * Maintenance of Resource Finder * CD-ROMs not networked * Communications * Voyager search limitations. An unexpected collaboration with the Web Development Committee on the Resource Finder helped to steer the Group to more detailed descriptions of bibliographic access. This collaboration included development of data elements for the Resource Finder database, and some discussions on Library staff processing of the resources. The Web Resources Group invited expert testimony to help the Group broaden its view to envision public use of the resources and discuss concerns related to technical services processing. The first testimony came from members of the Resource Finder Committee. Some background information on the Web Development Resource Finder Committee was shared. The second testimony was from librarians who select electronic texts. Three main themes were addressed: accessing CD-ROMs; the issue of including non-networked CD-ROMs in the Resource Finder; and, some special concerns about electronic texts. The third testimony came from librarians who select indexes and abstracts and also provide Reference services. Appendices to this report include minutes of the meetings with the experts (Appendix A), a list of proposed data elements to be used in the Resource Finder (Appendix B), and recommendations made to the Resource Finder Committee (Appendix C). Below are summaries of the key elements.

Date

21. 4.2002 10:22:31

0.012480095 = product of:
  0.02496019 = sum of:
    0.02496019 = product of:
      0.04992038 = sum of:
        0.04992038 = weight(_text_:22 in 486) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04992038 = score(doc=486,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 486, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=486)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 1.2022 14:01:14

0.010920083 = product of:
  0.021840166 = sum of:
    0.021840166 = product of:
      0.043680333 = sum of:
        0.043680333 = weight(_text_:22 in 6122) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043680333 = score(doc=6122,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 6122, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6122)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Noch ist nicht entschieden mit welcher Vehemenz das sogenannte Web 2.0 die Bibliotheken verändern wird. Allerdings wird hier und da bereits mit Bezugnahme auf das sogenannte Semantic Web von einer dritten und mancherorts von einer vierten Generation des Web gesprochen. Der Vortrag hinterfragt kritisch, welche Konzepte sich hinter diesen Bezeichnungen verbergen und geht der Frage nach, welche Herausforderungen eine Übernahme dieser Konzepte für die Bibliothekswelt mit sich bringen würde. Vgl. insbes. Folie 22 mit einer Darstellung von der Entwicklung vom Web 1.0 zum Web 4.0

0.009360071 = product of:
  0.018720143 = sum of:
    0.018720143 = product of:
      0.037440285 = sum of:
        0.037440285 = weight(_text_:22 in 3397) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037440285 = score(doc=3397,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3397, 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=3397)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

"Zweimal täglich googeln" empfiehlt Mathias Bröckers in seinem Buch "Verschwörungen, Verschwörungstheorien und die Geheimnisse des 11.9.". Der Band gilt den gutbürgerlichen Medien von FAZ bis Spiegel als Musterbeispiel krankhafter Verschwörungstheorie. Dabei wollte der Autor - nach eigenem Bekunden - keine Verschwörungstheorie zum 11. September vorlegen, sondern lediglich auf Widersprüche und Fragwürdigkeiten in den amtlichen Darstellungen und Erklärungen der US-Regierung zu jenem Terroranschlag hinweisen. Unabhängig davon, wie ernst diese Einlassungen des Autors zu nehmen sind, ist der "Fall Bröckers" für die Erforschung von Verschwörungstheorien unter zwei Aspekten interessant: Erstens geht der Band auf ein [[extern] ] konspirologisches Tagebuch zurück, das der Autor zwischen dem 13. September 2001 und dem 22. März 2002 für das Online-Magazin Telepolis verfasst hat; zweitens behauptet Bröckers in der Einleitung zum Buch, dass er für seine Arbeit ausschließlich über das Netz zugängliche Quellen genutzt habe. Hierbei hätte ihm Google unverzichtbare Dienste geleistet: Um an die Informationen in diesem Buch zu kommen, musste ich weder über besondere Beziehungen verfügen, noch mich mit Schlapphüten und Turbanträgern zu klandestinen Treffen verabreden - alle Quellen liegen offen. Sie zu finden, leistete mir die Internet-Suchmaschine Google unschätzbare Dienste. Mathias Bröckers

0.009360071 = product of:
  0.018720143 = sum of:
    0.018720143 = product of:
      0.037440285 = sum of:
        0.037440285 = weight(_text_:22 in 2118) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037440285 = score(doc=2118,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2118, 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=2118)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

5. 7.2015 22:02:31

0.0054600416 = product of:
  0.010920083 = sum of:
    0.010920083 = product of:
      0.021840166 = sum of:
        0.021840166 = weight(_text_:22 in 4609) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021840166 = score(doc=4609,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 4609, 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=4609)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

24.10.2008 14:19:22

0.0033143433 = product of:
  0.0066286866 = sum of:
    0.0066286866 = product of:
      0.013257373 = sum of:
        0.013257373 = weight(_text_:a in 3387) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013257373 = score(doc=3387,freq=48.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.24964198 = fieldWeight in 3387, product of:
              6.928203 = tf(freq=48.0), with freq of:
                48.0 = termFreq=48.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3387)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Ontologies are currently a buzzword in many communities, hailed as a mechanism for making better use of the Web. They offer a shared definition of a domain that can be understood by computers, enabling them to complete more meaningful tasks. Although ontologies of different descriptions have been in development and use for some time, it is their potential as a key technology in the Semantic Web which is responsible for the current wave of interest. Communities have different expectations of the Semantic Web and how it will be realised, but it is generally believed that ontologies will play a major role. In light of their potential in this new context, much current effort is focusing an developing languages and tools. OWL (Web Ontology Language) has recently become a standard, and builds an top of existing Web languages such as XML and RDF to offer a high degree of expressiveness. A variety of tools are emerging for creating, editing and managing ontologies in OWL. Ontologies have a range of potential benefits and applications in further and higher education, including the sharing of information across educational systems, providing frameworks for learning object reuse, and enabling intelligent and personalised student support. The difficulties inherent in creating a model of a domain are being tackled, and the communities involved in ontology development are working together to achieve their vision of the Semantic Web. This Technology and Standards Watch report discusses ontologies and their role in the Semantic Web, with a special focus an their implications for teaching and learning. This report will introduce ontologies to the further and higher education community, explaining why they are being developed, what they hope to achieve, and their potential benefits to the community. Current ontology tools and standards will be described, and the emphasis will be an introducing the technology to a new audience and exploring its risks and potential applications in teaching and learning. At a time when educational programmes based an ontologies are starting to be developed, the author hopes to increase understanding of the key issues in the wider community.

Content

"Ontologies promise "a shared and common understanding of a domain that can be communicated between people and application systems" [1]. They attempt to formulate a thorough and rigorous representation of a domain by specifying all of its concepts, the relationships between them and the conditions and regulations of the domain. Ontologies can express hierarchical links between entities as well as other semantic relations. An example of part of an ontology is provided in Figure 1, in which it is specified not only that an author is a person and that a book is a publication, but also that an author writes a book and that a book has chapters."

0.0029000505 = product of:
  0.005800101 = sum of:
    0.005800101 = product of:
      0.011600202 = sum of:
        0.011600202 = weight(_text_:a in 4438) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011600202 = score(doc=4438,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.21843673 = fieldWeight in 4438, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4438)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This paper presents findings from a study of how knowledge workers use the Web to seek external information as part of their daily work. 34 users from 7 companies took part in the study. Participants were mainly IT-specialists, managers, and research/marketing/consulting staff working in organizations that included a large utility company; a major bank, and a consulting firm. Participants answered a detailed questionnaire and were interviewed individually in order to understand their information needs and information seeking preferences. A custom-developed WebTracker software application was installed on each of their work place PCs, and participants' Web-use activities were then recorded continuously during two-week periods

0.0028703054 = product of:
  0.005740611 = sum of:
    0.005740611 = product of:
      0.011481222 = sum of:
        0.011481222 = weight(_text_:a in 3212) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011481222 = score(doc=3212,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 3212, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3212)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.0028703054 = product of:
  0.005740611 = sum of:
    0.005740611 = product of:
      0.011481222 = sum of:
        0.011481222 = weight(_text_:a in 5673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011481222 = score(doc=5673,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 5673, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5673)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Wide ranging article providing background information on the search process. Also includes a considerable amount of information about formulating searches and the difficult process of getting relevant returns from a search

0.0028703054 = product of:
  0.005740611 = sum of:
    0.005740611 = product of:
      0.011481222 = sum of:
        0.011481222 = weight(_text_:a in 1229) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011481222 = score(doc=1229,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 1229, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1229)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

DOI-X is a prototype metadata database designed to support DOI lookups. The prototype is intended to address the integration of metadata registration and maintenance with basic DOI registration and maintenance, enabling publishers to use a single mechanism and a single quality-assurance process to register both DOIs and their associated metadata. It also contains the lookup mechanisms necessary to access the journal article metadata, both on a single-item lookup basis and on a batch basis, such as would facilitate reference linking. The prototype database was introduced and demonstrated to attendees at the STM International Meeting and the Frankfurt Book Fair in October 1999. This paper discusses the background for the creation of DOI-X and its salient features.

Type

a

0.00270615 = product of:
  0.0054123 = sum of:
    0.0054123 = product of:
      0.0108246 = sum of:
        0.0108246 = weight(_text_:a in 910) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0108246 = score(doc=910,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 910, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=910)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.00270615 = product of:
  0.0054123 = sum of:
    0.0054123 = product of:
      0.0108246 = sum of:
        0.0108246 = weight(_text_:a in 5903) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0108246 = score(doc=5903,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 5903, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5903)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.00270615 = product of:
  0.0054123 = sum of:
    0.0054123 = product of:
      0.0108246 = sum of:
        0.0108246 = weight(_text_:a in 5971) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0108246 = score(doc=5971,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 5971, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5971)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.0026742492 = product of:
  0.0053484985 = sum of:
    0.0053484985 = product of:
      0.010696997 = sum of:
        0.010696997 = weight(_text_:a in 1241) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010696997 = score(doc=1241,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.20142901 = fieldWeight in 1241, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1241)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This is the second part of two articles about reference linking in hybrid digital libraries. The first part, Frameworks for Linking described the current state-of-the-art and contrasted various approaches to the problem. It identified static and dynamic linking solutions, as well as open and closed linking frameworks. It also included an extensive bibliography. The second part describes our work at the University of Ghent to address these issues. SFX is a generic linking system that we have developed for our own needs, but its underlying concepts can be applied in a wide range of digital libraries. This is a description of the approach to the creation of extended services in a hybrid library environment that has been taken by the Library Automation team at the University of Ghent. The ongoing research has been grouped under the working title Special Effects (SFX). In order to explain the SFX-concepts in a comprehensive way, the discussion will start with a brief description of pre-SFX experiments. Thereafter, the basics of the SFX-approach are explained briefly, in combination with concrete implementation choices taken for the Elektron SFX-linking experiment. Elektron was the name of a modest digital library collaboration between the Universities of Ghent, Louvain and Antwerp.

Type

a