Search (33 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × type_ss:"n"
  1. Z39.19-1993: Guidelines for the construction, format, and management of monolingual thesauri (1993) 0.03
    0.02766634 = product of:
      0.05533268 = sum of:
        0.05533268 = sum of:
          0.0054123 = weight(_text_:a in 4092) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.0054123 = score(doc=4092,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 4092, 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=4092)
          0.04992038 = weight(_text_:22 in 4092) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.04992038 = score(doc=4092,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4092, 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=4092)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This 1993 edition is the authoritative guide constructing single-language thesauri, one of the most powerful tools for information retrieval. Written by experts, Z39.19 shows how to formulate descriptors, establish relationships among terms, and present the information in print and on a screen. Also included are thesaurus maintenance procedures and recommended features for thesaurus management systems
    Footnote
    Rez. in: Knowledge organization 22(1995) no.3/4, S.180-181 (M. Hudon)
  2. OWL Web Ontology Language Test Cases (2004) 0.01
    0.012480095 = product of:
      0.02496019 = sum of:
        0.02496019 = product of:
          0.04992038 = sum of:
            0.04992038 = weight(_text_:22 in 4685) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04992038 = score(doc=4685,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4685, 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=4685)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    14. 8.2011 13:33:22
  3. Bibliotheks- und Dokumentationswesen : Gestaltung und Erschließung von Dokumenten, Bibliotheksmanagement, Codierungs- und Nummerungssysteme, Bestandserhaltung in Archiven und Bibliotheken (2002) 0.01
    0.011484617 = product of:
      0.022969235 = sum of:
        0.022969235 = sum of:
          0.001353075 = weight(_text_:a in 1704) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.001353075 = score(doc=1704,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.025478978 = fieldWeight in 1704, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1704)
          0.021616159 = weight(_text_:22 in 1704) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.021616159 = score(doc=1704,freq=6.0), product of:
              0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.1340265 = fieldWeight in 1704, product of:
                2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                  6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1704)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Am Anfang war das Wort. Sehr viel später erfand ein gewisser Herr Gutenberg ein Handgießinstrument zur Herstellung von Drucktypen. Und was sich daraus entwickelte, ist bekannt: Die moderne Informations- und Kommunikationsgesellschaft, deren Dynamik nicht zuletzt von der Effektivität der Daten-, Dokumenten- und Schriftgutverwaltung abhängt. Beim DIN-Taschenbuch 343 Bibliotheks- und Dokumentationswesen handelt es sich um ein Normenkompendium, das genau diese Verfahren aufgreift: Es stellt der interessierten Fachöffentlichkeit insgesamt 22 nationale und internationale Normen der Bereiche "Gestaltung und Erschließung von Dokumenten", "Bibliotheksmanagement", "Codierungs- und Nummerungssysteme" sowie "Bestandserhaltung in Archiven und Bibliotheken" vor. Die Auswahl der Normen verdeutlicht zweierlei: Zum einen den Einfluss der sich ständig weiterentwickelnden und dabei konvergierenden Technologien, der u.a. das Publizieren und die Datenrecherche beeinflusst. Zum zweiten die Notwendigkeit, neue Anforderungen zu berücksichtigen, die sich aus dem stetig zunehmenden internationalen Datenaustausch ergeben. Das DIN-Taschenbuch verschafft einen genauen Überblick über den Zusammenhang zwischen einschlägigen DIN- und ISO-Normen und klärt über Namencodes von Ländern und deren Untereinheiten auf (DIN ISO 3166-2:2001). Komplettiert wird das Werk durch den vollständigen Abdruck des DINFachberichts 13 "Bau- und Nutzungplanung von wissenschaftlichen Bibliotheken". Dort werden Bibliotheken als Servicezentren verstanden, die zunehmend digitalisierte Informationsquellen bereit stellen.
    Content
    Enthält 22 vollständig abgedruckte nationale und internationale Normen für die Bereiche Archiv-, Bibliotheks-, Dokumentations-, Museums- und Verlagswesen
    Footnote
    Rez. in: ABI-Technik 21(2002) H.3, S.294-295 (K. Weishaupt); "Im Deutschen Institut für Normung ist der Normenausschuss Bibliotheks- und Dokumentationswesen (NABD) verantwortlich für die nationale Normung für das Erstellen, Publizieren, Erschließen, Erhalten, Wiederauffinden, Vermitteln und die Nutzung von Dokumenten, Daten und Schriftgut für die Bereiche Archiv-, Bibliotheks, Dokumentations-, Museumsund Verlagswesen. Mit dem neuen DIN-Taschenbuch will er einen Überblick über die DIN-Normen geben, die in den letzten Jahren auf internationaler Ebene unter aktiver deutscher Mitarbeit veröffentlicht, dann als DIN-Normen übernommen worden sind und die den veränderten Anforderungen der Informations- und Kommunikationsgesellschaft Rechnung tragen - so die eigenen Angaben des Ausschusses im Vorwort (S. XI). Vor dem Hintergrund dieses recht offen formulierten Anspruches kommt es zu einer Zusammenstellung von 22 Normen, die auf den ersten Blick recht bunt gemischt wirkt: Abgedruckt sind Normen zur Erstellung und Weiterentwicklung von Thesauri, zu Titelangaben von Dokumenten, Kürzungs- und Transliterationsregeln, Sortierregeln, Abschnittsnummerierungen, Ländernamen, zur ISBN, ISSN sowie den Standardnummern ISMN und ISWC für Musikalien, zu Leistungsindikatoren für Bibliotheken und zu Lebensdauer-Klassen von Papier und Karton, Anforderungen an die Aufbewahrung von Archiv- und Bibliotheksgut und zur Alterungsbeständigkeit von Schriften. Der DIN-Fachbericht "Bau- und Nutzungsplanung von wissenschaftlichen Bibliotheken" rundet das Werk ab. Negativ ausgedrückt: Es wird niemanden geben, der für seinen beruflichen Alltag all diese Normen benötigt. Die positive Sicht: Das DIN-Taschenbuch deckt so viele Themen ab, dass der Kreis der Interessierten recht groß sein dürfte. Auf alle Fälle ist beeindruckend, zu wie vielen Themen aus den Bereich des Bibliotheks- und Dokumentationswesens es Normen gibt; vermutlich ist deren Existenz nicht einmal der Fachöffentlichkeit in vollem Umfang bekannt. Ein solches Beispiel ist DIN 1505, Teil 2: "Titelangaben von Dokumenten: Zitierregeln"; diese Norm wendet sich "an Autoren, Verleger und Redakteure und soll für Literaturzusammenstellungen, für Literaturverzeichnisse am Ende einer Schrift bzw. eines Beitrags, im Kontext oder in Fußnoten benutzt werden" (S. 38). Damit ist sie praktisch für alle relevant, die wissenschaftlich arbeiten und Texte schreiben - aber kaum jemand kennt diese Norm! Viele Zeitschriften und Fachgesellschaften haben ihre eigenen Regeln, nach denen zitiert werden soll. Im Institut Arbeit und Technik in Gelsenkirchen ist vor einigen Jahren mit Förderung der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft die Software LibLink entwickelt worden, mit der aus MAB-Daten, die aus einem Bibliothekskatalog exportiert worden waren, automatisiert Literaturverzeichnisse für wissenschaftliche Texte erstellt werden sollten.
    Das erwies sich als äußerst schwierig, da es erstens keinen allgemein anerkannten Standard fürs Zitieren gibt und zweitens zwischen Literaturverzeichnissen wissenschaftlicher Texte und Bibliotheksdaten Diskrepanzen bestehen, die nicht automatisiert bereinigt werden können. Wie sich im Laufe des Projektes gezeigt hat, gilt das auch für Literaturverzeichnisse, die nach DIN 1505 gestaltet werden, obwohl diese Norm im Zusammenarbeit mit der Deutschen Bibliothek und dokumentarischen Berufsverbänden entwickelt worden ist und eine eindeutige Nähe zu bibliothekarischen Katalogisierungsregeln aufweist Warum sich die Norm nicht durchgesetzt hat, darüber kann nur spekuliert werden. Möglich ist, dass der Text mit einem Umfang von 18 Seiten - allein für Teil 2 der Norm! - zu umfangreich ist, als dass sich jemand, der sich für Formalia des wissenschaftlichen Arbeitens nur am Rande interessiert, wirklich damit beschäftigen würde. Möglich ist ferner, dass das Zitierformat zu nah an bibliothekarische Regeln angelehnt ist und einige Gepflogenheiten wissenschaftlicher Literaturverzeichnisse, die sich bei aller Uneinheitlichkeit doch durchgesetzt haben - nicht ausreichend berücksichtigt: Die Tendenz geht zu einer recht knappen Zitierweise, außerdem steht das Erscheinungsjahr inzwischen fast immer direkt hinter der Verfasserangabe und nicht irgendwo am Ende einer langen Titelaufnahme. Wie dem auch sei: Es ist bedauerlich, dass die Regelungen der Norm so wenig bekannt sind und damit kaum als Hilfestellung bei der oft auch beklagten Unsicherheit, wie korrekt zu zitieren sei, angesehen werden können. Vielleicht wäre hier eine viel intensivere Öffentlichkeitsarbeit angesagt, der Abdruck in einem neuen DIN-Taschenbuch ist sicherlich ein Schritt in die richtige Richtung. Eine andere Maßnahme wäre eine Aktualisierung der Norm; immerhin ist sie seit Januar 1984 unverändert geblieben. Über Namensverfremdungen wie Ernst T. A. Hoffmann ist die Bibliothekswelt inzwischen hinaus; ob gerade solch eine Regelung der Abkürzung von Vornamen und die Aufführung dieses Beispiels die Akzeptanz der Norm fördern, erscheint mehr als fraglich. Es ist im Rahmen einer Rezension nicht möglich, auf jede einzelne abgedruckte Norm inhaltlich einzugehen, daher nur noch einige Bemerkungen zu besonderen Auffälligkeiten. Das Taschenbuch gibt die internationale Norm ISO 690-2 (in englischer Sprache) wieder: "Information and documentation - Bibliographic references - Part 2: Electronic documents or parts thereof". Bei solch einem Thema, bei dem noch allgemeine Unsicherheit herrscht, ist es sehr hilfreich, mit der Norm eine Richtschnur an die Hand zu bekommen, auch wenn der Text selbst realistischerweise nicht den Anspruch erhebt, das Problem abschließend zu behandeln. Auf ein ganz besonders schwieriges Gebiet haben sich die Normungsausschüsse vorgewagt, als sie die internationale Norm ISO 11620 "Leistungsindikatoren für Bibliotheken" entwickelt haben, die ins Deutsche übersetzt und unverändert als DIN-Norm übernommen worden ist. Der Zweck der Norm wird eher zurückhaltend formuliert: Es geht darum, "den Gebrauch von Leistungsindikatoren in Bibliotheken zu unterstützen und Kenntnisse über die Durchführung von Leistungsmessung zu verbreiten" (S. 171). Dabei wird ausdrücklich zugestanden, dass es auch Leistungsindikatoren geben kann, die in dieser Norm nicht aufgeführt sind. Eine sehr realistische und damit sympathische Sicht für eine Fragestellung, die eins der jüngsten Probleme der bibliothekarischen Berufspraxis berührt und vermutlich nie erschöpfend ausdiskutiert werden kann! Im Vergleich dazu wirken Abkürzungs-, Transliterations- und Ordnungsregeln geradezu trivial. Aber alle, die im Bibliotheks- und Dokumentationsbereich tätig sind, wissen, dass es ohne Sorgfalt im Kleinen nicht geht und exakte Regelungen die tägliche Arbeit eher erleichtern.
  4. Panizzi, A.: Rules for the compilation of the catalogue (1841) 0.00
    0.0035799001 = product of:
      0.0071598003 = sum of:
        0.0071598003 = product of:
          0.014319601 = sum of:
            0.014319601 = weight(_text_:a in 4940) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.014319601 = score(doc=4940,freq=14.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.26964417 = fieldWeight in 4940, product of:
                  3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                    14.0 = termFreq=14.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4940)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Footnote
    Vgl. auch: Crestadoro, A.: The art of making catalogues of libraries: or, a method to obtain in a short time a most perfect, complete, and satisfactory printed catalog of the British Museum Library / by a reader therein [i.e. A. Crestadoro]. London: Published and sold by The Literary, Scientific & Artistic Reference Office 1856.
  5. ISO 999: Index of a publication (1975) 0.00
    0.00270615 = product of:
      0.0054123 = sum of:
        0.0054123 = product of:
          0.0108246 = sum of:
            0.0108246 = weight(_text_:a in 486) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0108246 = score(doc=486,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 486, 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=486)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
  6. Miller, E.; Schloss. B.; Lassila, O.; Swick, R.R.: Resource Description Framework (RDF) : model and syntax (1997) 0.00
    0.0025803389 = product of:
      0.0051606777 = sum of:
        0.0051606777 = product of:
          0.010321355 = sum of:
            0.010321355 = weight(_text_:a in 5903) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.010321355 = score(doc=5903,freq=38.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.19435552 = fieldWeight in 5903, product of:
                  6.164414 = tf(freq=38.0), with freq of:
                    38.0 = termFreq=38.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=5903)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    RDF - the Resource Description Framework - is a foundation for processing metadata; it provides interoperability between applications that exchange machine-understandable information on the Web. RDF emphasizes facilities to enable automated processing of Web resources. RDF metadata can be used in a variety of application areas; for example: in resource discovery to provide better search engine capabilities; in cataloging for describing the content and content relationships available at a particular Web site, page, or digital library; by intelligent software agents to facilitate knowledge sharing and exchange; in content rating; in describing collections of pages that represent a single logical "document"; for describing intellectual property rights of Web pages, and in many others. RDF with digital signatures will be key to building the "Web of Trust" for electronic commerce, collaboration, and other applications. Metadata is "data about data" or specifically in the context of RDF "data describing web resources." The distinction between "data" and "metadata" is not an absolute one; it is a distinction created primarily by a particular application. Many times the same resource will be interpreted in both ways simultaneously. RDF encourages this view by using XML as the encoding syntax for the metadata. The resources being described by RDF are, in general, anything that can be named via a URI. The broad goal of RDF is to define a mechanism for describing resources that makes no assumptions about a particular application domain, nor defines the semantics of any application domain. The definition of the mechanism should be domain neutral, yet the mechanism should be suitable for describing information about any domain. This document introduces a model for representing RDF metadata and one syntax for expressing and transporting this metadata in a manner that maximizes the interoperability of independently developed web servers and clients. The syntax described in this document is best considered as a "serialization syntax" for the underlying RDF representation model. The serialization syntax is XML, XML being the W3C's work-in-progress to define a richer Web syntax for a variety of applications. RDF and XML are complementary; there will be alternate ways to represent the same RDF data model, some more suitable for direct human authoring. Future work may lead to including such alternatives in this document.
    Content
    RDF Data Model At the core of RDF is a model for representing named properties and their values. These properties serve both to represent attributes of resources (and in this sense correspond to usual attribute-value-pairs) and to represent relationships between resources. The RDF data model is a syntax-independent way of representing RDF statements. RDF statements that are syntactically very different could mean the same thing. This concept of equivalence in meaning is very important when performing queries, aggregation and a number of other tasks at which RDF is aimed. The equivalence is defined in a clean machine understandable way. Two pieces of RDF are equivalent if and only if their corresponding data model representations are the same. Table of contents 1. Introduction 2. RDF Data Model 3. RDF Grammar 4. Signed RDF 5. Examples 6. Appendix A: Brief Explanation of XML Namespaces
  7. OWL Web Ontology Language Semantics and Abstract Syntax (2004) 0.00
    0.0024857575 = product of:
      0.004971515 = sum of:
        0.004971515 = product of:
          0.00994303 = sum of:
            0.00994303 = weight(_text_:a in 4683) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.00994303 = score(doc=4683,freq=12.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.18723148 = fieldWeight in 4683, product of:
                  3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                    12.0 = termFreq=12.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4683)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This description of OWL, the Web Ontology Language being designed by the W3C Web Ontology Working Group, contains a high-level abstract syntax for both OWL DL and OWL Lite, sublanguages of OWL. A model-theoretic semantics is given to provide a formal meaning for OWL ontologies written in this abstract syntax. A model-theoretic semantics in the form of an extension to the RDF semantics is also given to provide a formal meaning for OWL ontologies as RDF graphs (OWL Full). A mapping from the abstract syntax to RDF graphs is given and the two model theories are shown to have the same consequences on OWL ontologies that can be written in the abstract syntax.
  8. SKOS Core Guide (2005) 0.00
    0.0024857575 = product of:
      0.004971515 = sum of:
        0.004971515 = product of:
          0.00994303 = sum of:
            0.00994303 = weight(_text_:a in 4689) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.00994303 = score(doc=4689,freq=12.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.18723148 = fieldWeight in 4689, product of:
                  3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                    12.0 = termFreq=12.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4689)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    SKOS Core provides a model for expressing the basic structure and content of concept schemes such as thesauri, classification schemes, subject heading lists, taxonomies, 'folksonomies', other types of controlled vocabulary, and also concept schemes embedded in glossaries and terminologies. The SKOS Core Vocabulary is an application of the Resource Description Framework (RDF), that can be used to express a concept scheme as an RDF graph. Using RDF allows data to be linked to and/or merged with other data, enabling data sources to be distributed across the web, but still be meaningfully composed and integrated. This document is a guide using the SKOS Core Vocabulary, for readers who already have a basic understanding of RDF concepts. This edition of the SKOS Core Guide [SKOS Core Guide] is a W3C Public Working Draft. It is the authoritative guide to recommended usage of the SKOS Core Vocabulary at the time of publication.
    Editor
    Miles, A. u. D. Brickley
  9. Kaplan, A.G.; Riedling, A.M.: Catalog it! : a guide to cataloging school library materials (2015) 0.00
    0.0023919214 = product of:
      0.0047838427 = sum of:
        0.0047838427 = product of:
          0.009567685 = sum of:
            0.009567685 = weight(_text_:a in 2379) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.009567685 = score(doc=2379,freq=16.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.18016359 = fieldWeight in 2379, product of:
                  4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                    16.0 = termFreq=16.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2379)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This invaluable cataloging resource gives pre-service and practicing school library media specialists the tools they need to be intelligent consumers of commercial cataloging and competent organizers of new materials in their collections. The second edition contains expanded information on Library of Congress Subject Headings and electronic cataloging and cataloging systems, as well as Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) and Machine Readable Cataloging (MARC). Whether you're a practicing cataloger looking for a short text to update you on the application of RDA to cataloging records or a school librarian who needs a quick resource to answer cataloging questions, this guide is for you. - Thoroughly updates a best-selling, essential guide to cataloging - Addresses the new standards specifically as they apply to school libraries - Helps school librarians understand and implement the new cataloging standards in their collections - Distills the latest information and presents it in a format that is clear and accessible - Fills the need for up-to-the-minute cataloging guidance for the busy librarian who wants information in a hurry
  10. Baumert, A.: RAKFORM: bibliothekarische Titelaufnahmen nach den Regeln für die alphabetische Katalogisierung in der EDV : Bedienungsanleitung und Quellcode für die programmierte Verarbeitung (1989) 0.00
    0.0023678814 = product of:
      0.0047357627 = sum of:
        0.0047357627 = product of:
          0.009471525 = sum of:
            0.009471525 = weight(_text_:a in 6007) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.009471525 = score(doc=6007,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 6007, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6007)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
  11. Z39.4-199X: Indexes and related information retrieval devices (1993) 0.00
    0.0023678814 = product of:
      0.0047357627 = sum of:
        0.0047357627 = product of:
          0.009471525 = sum of:
            0.009471525 = weight(_text_:a in 8518) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.009471525 = score(doc=8518,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 8518, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=8518)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This draft standard provides guidelines and a uniform vocabulary to prepare back-of-the-book and machine generated indexes
  12. Bechhofer, S.; Harmelen, F. van; Hendler, J.; Horrocks, I.; McGuinness, D.L.; Patel-Schneider, P.F.; Stein, L.A.: OWL Web Ontology Language Reference (2004) 0.00
    0.0023678814 = product of:
      0.0047357627 = sum of:
        0.0047357627 = product of:
          0.009471525 = sum of:
            0.009471525 = weight(_text_:a in 4684) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.009471525 = score(doc=4684,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 4684, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4684)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The Web Ontology Language OWL is a semantic markup language for publishing and sharing ontologies on the World Wide Web. OWL is developed as a vocabulary extension of RDF (the Resource Description Framework) and is derived from the DAML+OIL Web Ontology Language. This document contains a structured informal description of the full set of OWL language constructs and is meant to serve as a reference for OWL users who want to construct OWL ontologies.
  13. Hori, M.; Euzenat, J.; Patel-Schneider, P.F.: OWL Web Ontology Language XML Presentation Syntax (2003) 0.00
    0.0023435948 = product of:
      0.0046871896 = sum of:
        0.0046871896 = product of:
          0.009374379 = sum of:
            0.009374379 = weight(_text_:a in 4680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.009374379 = score(doc=4680,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.17652355 = fieldWeight in 4680, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4680)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This document specifies XML presentation syntax for OWL, which is defined as a dialect similar to OWL Abstract Syntax [OWL Semantics]. It is not intended to be a normative specification. Instead, it represents a suggestion of one possible XML presentation syntax for OWL.
  14. OWL Web Ontology Language Use Cases and Requirements (2004) 0.00
    0.0023435948 = product of:
      0.0046871896 = sum of:
        0.0046871896 = product of:
          0.009374379 = sum of:
            0.009374379 = weight(_text_:a in 4686) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.009374379 = score(doc=4686,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.17652355 = fieldWeight in 4686, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4686)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This document specifies usage scenarios, goals and requirements for a web ontology language. An ontology formally defines a common set of terms that are used to describe and represent a domain. Ontologies can be used by automated tools to power advanced services such as more accurate web search, intelligent software agents and knowledge management.
  15. Le Boeuf, P.; Riva, P.; Zumer, M.: FRBR - Library Reference Model : draft for World-Wide Review (2016) 0.00
    0.002269176 = product of:
      0.004538352 = sum of:
        0.004538352 = product of:
          0.009076704 = sum of:
            0.009076704 = weight(_text_:a in 2881) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.009076704 = score(doc=2881,freq=10.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 2881, product of:
                  3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                    10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2881)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The FRBR Review Group worked actively towards a consolidated model starting in 2010, in a series of working meetings held in conjunction with IFLA conferences and at an additional mid-year meeting in April 2012 during which the user task consolidation was first drafted. In 2013 in Singapore, the FRBR Review Group constituted a Consolidation Editorial Group (CEG) to focus on the detailed reassessment of attribute s and relationships, and the drafting of this model document. The CEG (at times with other FRBR Review Group members or invited experts) held five multi-day meetings, as well as discussing progress in detail with the FRBR Review Group as a whole during a working meeting in 2014 in Lyon and another in 2015 in Cape Town.
  16. ISO 25964 Thesauri and interoperability with other vocabularies (2008) 0.00
    0.001965164 = product of:
      0.003930328 = sum of:
        0.003930328 = product of:
          0.007860656 = sum of:
            0.007860656 = weight(_text_:a in 1169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.007860656 = score(doc=1169,freq=30.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.1480195 = fieldWeight in 1169, product of:
                  5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
                    30.0 = termFreq=30.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1169)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    T.1: Today's thesauri are mostly electronic tools, having moved on from the paper-based era when thesaurus standards were first developed. They are built and maintained with the support of software and need to integrate with other software, such as search engines and content management systems. Whereas in the past thesauri were designed for information professionals trained in indexing and searching, today there is a demand for vocabularies that untrained users will find to be intuitive. ISO 25964 makes the transition needed for the world of electronic information management. However, part 1 retains the assumption that human intellect is usually involved in the selection of indexing terms and in the selection of search terms. If both the indexer and the searcher are guided to choose the same term for the same concept, then relevant documents will be retrieved. This is the main principle underlying thesaurus design, even though a thesaurus built for human users may also be applied in situations where computers make the choices. Efficient exchange of data is a vital component of thesaurus management and exploitation. Hence the inclusion in this standard of recommendations for exchange formats and protocols. Adoption of these will facilitate interoperability between thesaurus management systems and the other computer applications, such as indexing and retrieval systems, that will utilize the data. Thesauri are typically used in post-coordinate retrieval systems, but may also be applied to hierarchical directories, pre-coordinate indexes and classification systems. Increasingly, thesaurus applications need to mesh with others, such as automatic categorization schemes, free-text search systems, etc. Part 2 of ISO 25964 describes additional types of structured vocabulary and gives recommendations to enable interoperation of the vocabularies at all stages of the information storage and retrieval process.
    T.2: The ability to identify and locate relevant information among vast collections and other resources is a major and pressing challenge today. Several different types of vocabulary are in use for this purpose. Some of the most widely used vocabularies were designed a hundred years ago and have been evolving steadily. A different generation of vocabularies is now emerging, designed to exploit the electronic media more effectively. A good understanding of the previous generation is still essential for effective access to collections indexed with them. An important object of ISO 25964 as a whole is to support data exchange and other forms of interoperability in circumstances in which more than one structured vocabulary is applied within one retrieval system or network. Sometimes one vocabulary has to be mapped to another, and it is important to understand both the potential and the limitations of such mappings. In other systems, a thesaurus is mapped to a classification scheme, or an ontology to a thesaurus. Comprehensive interoperability needs to cover the whole range of vocabulary types, whether young or old. Concepts in different vocabularies are related only in that they have the same or similar meaning. However, the meaning can be found in a number of different aspects within each particular type of structured vocabulary: - within terms or captions selected in different languages; - in the notation assigned indicating a place within a larger hierarchy; - in the definition, scope notes, history notes and other notes that explain the significance of that concept; and - in explicit relationships to other concepts or entities within the same vocabulary. In order to create mappings from one structured vocabulary to another it is first necessary to understand, within the context of each different type of structured vocabulary, the significance and relative importance of each of the different elements in defining the meaning of that particular concept. ISO 25964-1 describes the key characteristics of thesauri along with additional advice on best practice. ISO 25964-2 focuses on other types of vocabulary and does not attempt to cover all aspects of good practice. It concentrates on those aspects which need to be understood if one of the vocabularies is to work effectively alongside one or more of the others. Recognizing that a new standard cannot be applied to some existing vocabularies, this part of ISO 25964 provides informative description alongside the recommendations, the aim of which is to enable users and system developers to interpret and implement the existing vocabularies effectively. The remainder of ISO 25964-2 deals with the principles and practicalities of establishing mappings between vocabularies.
  17. ISO 15836:2003 The Dublin Core metadata element set. (2003) 0.00
    0.001757696 = product of:
      0.003515392 = sum of:
        0.003515392 = product of:
          0.007030784 = sum of:
            0.007030784 = weight(_text_:a in 2079) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.007030784 = score(doc=2079,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 2079, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2079)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The Dublin Core metadata standard provides a core set of 15 metadata elements for cross-domain information resource sharing. Since the original workshop, held in March 1995 in Dublin, Ohio - thus the name Dublin Core - this core set of metadata elements has gained worldwide recognition and use, with translations in over 20 languages. The issuance of the ISO standard provides the official international endorsement for use of theDublin Core metadata. Under NISO's leadership this standard was fast-tracked in ISO Technical Committee 45 (Information and documentation) Subcommittee 4 (Technical Interoperability) through the ISO approval process using a version identical to ANSI/NISO Z39.85-2001
    Footnote
    ISO 15836 is available for purchase in electronic or paper formats, in English and French, from ISO <http://www.iso.ch/>. A free downloadable pdf file of the ANSI/NISO version is available from the National Information Standards Organization (NISO) website: <http:www.niso.org/standards/resources/Z39-85.pdf>
  18. RDA Toolkit (2) : August 2017 (2017) 0.00
    0.001757696 = product of:
      0.003515392 = sum of:
        0.003515392 = product of:
          0.007030784 = sum of:
            0.007030784 = weight(_text_:a in 3995) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.007030784 = score(doc=3995,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 3995, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3995)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Am 8. August 2017 ist das neue Release des RDA Toolkits<http://www.rdatoolkit.org/august2017release> erschienen. Mit diesem Release ist die deutsche Übersetzung auf demselben Stand wie die englische Originalausgabe vom April 2017. Alle Änderungen aus dem Proposalverfahren 2016 und auch aus den Fast Tracks (für kleinere Änderungen) sind eingearbeitet und übersetzt. Ebenfalls aktualisiert wurden Glossar und RDA Registry<http://www.rdaregistry.info/>. Die deutsche Übersetzung ist im Zeitplan des 3R-Projekts (RDA Toolkit Restructure and Redesign Projekt). Alle anderen Übersetzungen des RDA Toolkits werden später im Jahr folgen. Die Änderungsdokumentation für das August-Release des RDA Toolkit finden Sie im RDA-Info-Wiki<https://wiki.dnb.de/x/3xLSBg>. Aktualisiert wurden auch die von der Fachgruppe Erschließung (FG E) kooperativ erarbeiteten Anwendungsrichtlinien für den deutschsprachigen Raum (D-A-CH). Diese sind auch in Französisch abrufbar. Eine Gesamtübersicht der D-A-CH AWR pro Kapitel ist im RDA Toolkit unter dem Reiter "Ressourcen". Die Änderungsdokumentation der D-A-CH AWR finden Sie ebenfalls im RDA-Info-Wiki.<https://wiki.dnb.de/x/1hLSBg>. [Inetbib vom 09.08.2017].
  19. Z39.58-1992: Common command language for online interactive information retrieval (1992) 0.00
    0.0016913437 = product of:
      0.0033826875 = sum of:
        0.0033826875 = product of:
          0.006765375 = sum of:
            0.006765375 = weight(_text_:a in 4801) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.006765375 = score(doc=4801,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 4801, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4801)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Useful to system designers that want to specify a uniform command terminology, Z39.58-1992 describes nineteen non-proprietary command terms for use in online information retrieval systems. Defines the vocabulary, syntax, and operational meaning of the commands
  20. ¬The Dublin Core Metadata Element Set (2007) 0.00
    0.0016913437 = product of:
      0.0033826875 = sum of:
        0.0033826875 = product of:
          0.006765375 = sum of:
            0.006765375 = weight(_text_:a in 3395) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.006765375 = score(doc=3395,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 3395, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3395)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Defines fifteen metadata elements for resource description in a cross-disciplinary information environment