Search (82 results, page 1 of 5)

0.057257734 = product of:
  0.11451547 = sum of:
    0.11451547 = sum of:
      0.057909478 = weight(_text_:technology in 1757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.057909478 = score(doc=1757,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052224867 = queryNorm
          0.3722984 = fieldWeight in 1757, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1757)
      0.05660599 = weight(_text_:22 in 1757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05660599 = score(doc=1757,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052224867 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1757, 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=1757)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Computers play an important role in the development of bibliographic databases. Exchange formats are needed for the generation and exchange of bibliographic data at different levels: international, national, regional and local. Discusses the formats available at national and international level such as the International Standard Exchange Format (ISO 2709); the various MARC formats and the Common Communication Format (CCF). Work on Indian standards involving the Bureau of Indian Standards, the National Information System for Science and Technology (NISSAT) and other institutions proceeds only slowly

Source

DESIDOC bulletin of information technology. 17(1997) no.5, S.17-22

0.052938 = product of:
  0.105876 = sum of:
    0.105876 = sum of:
      0.03582966 = weight(_text_:technology in 5100) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03582966 = score(doc=5100,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052224867 = queryNorm
          0.23034787 = fieldWeight in 5100, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5100)
      0.07004634 = weight(_text_:22 in 5100) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07004634 = score(doc=5100,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052224867 = queryNorm
          0.38301262 = fieldWeight in 5100, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5100)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Briefly summarizes the problems encountered when attempting to use the USMARC cataloguing format in US school libraries and describes the development of CEMARC format by the Northwest Ohio Educational Technology Foundation (NWOET), which addresses the main problems by: offering sata entry guidelines for a minimum USMARC standard in order to clarify inconsistencies in application; and by suggesting enhancements and new fields that go beyond the USMARC standard. Concludes with brief notes on early CEMARC implementation

Date

11. 9.1996 19:22:20

Source

Literacy: traditional, cultural, technological. Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Conference of the International Association of School Librarianship (selected papers), Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh University, School of Library and Information Science, 17-22 Jul 94

0.04877709 = product of:
  0.09755418 = sum of:
    0.09755418 = sum of:
      0.040948182 = weight(_text_:technology in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.040948182 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052224867 = queryNorm
          0.2632547 = fieldWeight in 562, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=562)
      0.05660599 = weight(_text_:22 in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05660599 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052224867 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 562, 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=562)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The paper performs a thought experiment on the concept of a record based on the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records and library system functions, and concludes that if we want to develop a functional bibliographic record we need to do it within the context of a flexible, functional library systems record structure. The article suggests a new way to look at the library systems record that would allow libraries to move forward in terms of technology but also in terms of serving library users.

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.166-174

0.0429433 = product of:
  0.0858866 = sum of:
    0.0858866 = sum of:
      0.04343211 = weight(_text_:technology in 4752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04343211 = score(doc=4752,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052224867 = queryNorm
          0.2792238 = fieldWeight in 4752, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4752)
      0.042454492 = weight(_text_:22 in 4752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042454492 = score(doc=4752,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052224867 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4752, 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=4752)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

As educational technology becomes pervasive, demand will grow for library content to be incorporated into courseware. Among the barriers impeding interoperability between libraries and educational tools is the difference in specifications commonly used for the exchange of digital objects and metadata. Among libraries, Metadata Encoding and Transmission Standard (METS) is a new but increasingly popular standard; the IMS content-package (IMS-CP) plays a parallel role in educational technology. This article describes how METS-encoded library content can be converted into digital objects for IMS-compliant systems through an XSLT-based crosswalk. The conceptual models behind METS and IMS-CP are compared, the design and limitations of an XSLT-based translation are described, and the crosswalks are related to other techniques to enhance interoperability.

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1, S.69-81

0.04267995 = product of:
  0.0853599 = sum of:
    0.0853599 = sum of:
      0.03582966 = weight(_text_:technology in 8779) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03582966 = score(doc=8779,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052224867 = queryNorm
          0.23034787 = fieldWeight in 8779, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8779)
      0.04953024 = weight(_text_:22 in 8779) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04953024 = score(doc=8779,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052224867 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 8779, 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=8779)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Enthält die Beiträge: CAMPOS, F.: UNIMARC: state of the art on the universal format for international exchange; HOLT, B.: The maintenance of UNIMARC; WILLER, M.: UNIMARC / Authorities format; HOPKINSON, A.: CDS/ISIS as a tool for implementing UNIMARC; BERKE, S. u. M. SIPOS: The comprehensive information system of the National Széchényi Library and the Hungarian MARC format; SHRAIBERG, Y.: Application of the CDS/ISIS software package and UNIMARC format in the automated systems of the Russian National Public Library for Science and Technology and other libraries of the Russian Federation; STOKLASOVA, B.: Exchange formats in the Czech Republic: past, present and future

0.04267995 = product of:
  0.0853599 = sum of:
    0.0853599 = sum of:
      0.03582966 = weight(_text_:technology in 2425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03582966 = score(doc=2425,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052224867 = queryNorm
          0.23034787 = fieldWeight in 2425, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2425)
      0.04953024 = weight(_text_:22 in 2425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04953024 = score(doc=2425,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052224867 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2425, 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=2425)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 10th European conference, proceedings / ECDL 2006, Alicante, Spain, September 17 - 22, 2006

0.036582813 = product of:
  0.073165625 = sum of:
    0.073165625 = sum of:
      0.030711137 = weight(_text_:technology in 4748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.030711137 = score(doc=4748,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052224867 = queryNorm
          0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 4748, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4748)
      0.042454492 = weight(_text_:22 in 4748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042454492 = score(doc=4748,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052224867 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4748, 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=4748)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Metadata and information technology staff in libraries that are building digital collections typically extract and manipulate MARC metadata sets to provide access to digital content via non-MARC schemes. Metadata processing in these libraries involves defining the relationships between metadata schemes, moving metadata between schemes, and coordinating the intellectual activity and physical resources required to create and manipulate metadata. Actively managing the non-MARC metadata resources used to build digital collections is something most of these libraries have only begun to do. This article proposes strategies for managing MARC metadata repurposing efforts as the first step in a coordinated approach to library metadata management. Guided by lessons learned from Cornell University library mapping and transformation activities, the authors apply the literature of data resource management to library metadata management and propose a model for managing MARC metadata repurposing processes through the implementation of a metadata management design.

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.144-152

0.036582813 = product of:
  0.073165625 = sum of:
    0.073165625 = sum of:
      0.030711137 = weight(_text_:technology in 3841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.030711137 = score(doc=3841,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052224867 = queryNorm
          0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 3841, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3841)
      0.042454492 = weight(_text_:22 in 3841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042454492 = score(doc=3841,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052224867 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3841, 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=3841)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This entry describes the development of the MARC Communications format. After a brief overview of the initial 10 years it describes the succeeding phases of development up to the present. This takes the reader through the expansion of the format for all types of bibliographic data and for a multiple character scripts. At the same time a large business community was developing that offered products based on the format to the library community. The introduction of the Internet in the 1990s and the Web technology brought new opportunities and challenges and the format was adapted to this new environment. There has been a great deal of international adoption of the format that has continued into the 2000s. More recently new syntaxes for MARC 21 and models are being explored.

Date

27. 8.2011 14:22:38

0.035786085 = product of:
  0.07157217 = sum of:
    0.07157217 = sum of:
      0.036193423 = weight(_text_:technology in 154) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.036193423 = score(doc=154,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052224867 = queryNorm
          0.23268649 = fieldWeight in 154, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=154)
      0.035378743 = weight(_text_:22 in 154) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035378743 = score(doc=154,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052224867 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 154, 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=154)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Encoded Archival Description (EAD) has provided a new way to approach manuscript and archival collection representation. A review of previous representational practices and problems highlights the benefits of using EAD. This new approach should be considered a partner rather than an adversary in the access providing process. Technological capabilities now allow for multiple metadata schemas to be employed in the creation of the finding aid. Crosswalks allow for MARC records to be generated from the detailed encoding of an EAD finding aid. In the process of creating these crosswalks and detailed encoding, EAD has generated more changes in traditional processes and procedures than originally imagined. The North Carolina State University (NCSU) Libraries sought to test the process of crosswalking EAD to MARC, investigating how this process used technology as well as changed physical procedures. By creating a complex and indepth EAD template for finding aids, with accompanying related encoding analogs embedded within the element structure, MARC records were generated that required minor editing and revision for inclusion in the NCSU Libraries OPAC. The creation of this bridge between EAD and MARC has stimulated theoretical discussions about the role of collaboration, technology, and expertise in the ongoing struggle to maximize access to our collections. While this study is a only a first attempt at harnessing this potential, a presentation of the tensions, struggles, and successes provides illumination to some of the larger issues facing special collections today.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.030485678 = product of:
  0.060971357 = sum of:
    0.060971357 = sum of:
      0.025592614 = weight(_text_:technology in 2422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.025592614 = score(doc=2422,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052224867 = queryNorm
          0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 2422, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2422)
      0.035378743 = weight(_text_:22 in 2422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035378743 = score(doc=2422,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052224867 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2422, 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=2422)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 7th European Conference, proceedings / ECDL 2003, Trondheim, Norway, August 17-22, 2003

0.03001986 = product of:
  0.06003972 = sum of:
    0.06003972 = product of:
      0.12007944 = sum of:
        0.12007944 = weight(_text_:22 in 5743) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12007944 = score(doc=5743,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052224867 = queryNorm
            0.6565931 = fieldWeight in 5743, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5743)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

30. 3.2002 19:45:22

Source

Revista Española de Documentaçion Cientifica. 22(1999) no.2, S.198-219

0.028302995 = product of:
  0.05660599 = sum of:
    0.05660599 = product of:
      0.11321198 = sum of:
        0.11321198 = weight(_text_:22 in 2840) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11321198 = score(doc=2840,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052224867 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 2840, 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=2840)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1

0.02476512 = product of:
  0.04953024 = sum of:
    0.04953024 = product of:
      0.09906048 = sum of:
        0.09906048 = weight(_text_:22 in 7196) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09906048 = score(doc=7196,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052224867 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 7196, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=7196)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1

0.02476512 = product of:
  0.04953024 = sum of:
    0.04953024 = product of:
      0.09906048 = sum of:
        0.09906048 = weight(_text_:22 in 4973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09906048 = score(doc=4973,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052224867 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4973, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4973)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

26. 8.2000 19:22:35

0.02476512 = product of:
  0.04953024 = sum of:
    0.04953024 = product of:
      0.09906048 = sum of:
        0.09906048 = weight(_text_:22 in 6838) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09906048 = score(doc=6838,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052224867 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6838, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6838)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Dialog mit Bibliotheken. 13(2001) H.3, S.20-22

0.02476512 = product of:
  0.04953024 = sum of:
    0.04953024 = product of:
      0.09906048 = sum of:
        0.09906048 = weight(_text_:22 in 2841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09906048 = score(doc=2841,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052224867 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 2841, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2841)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2

0.021227246 = product of:
  0.042454492 = sum of:
    0.042454492 = product of:
      0.084908985 = sum of:
        0.084908985 = weight(_text_:22 in 6077) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.084908985 = score(doc=6077,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052224867 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6077, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6077)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

2. 8.2001 16:22:33

0.02001324 = product of:
  0.04002648 = sum of:
    0.04002648 = product of:
      0.08005296 = sum of:
        0.08005296 = weight(_text_:22 in 2408) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08005296 = score(doc=2408,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052224867 = queryNorm
            0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 2408, 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=2408)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

13. 1.2007 18:31:22

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) nos.3/4, S.43-58

0.02001324 = product of:
  0.04002648 = sum of:
    0.04002648 = product of:
      0.08005296 = sum of:
        0.08005296 = weight(_text_:22 in 2845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08005296 = score(doc=2845,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052224867 = queryNorm
            0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 2845, 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=2845)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

9.12.2005 19:22:38

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.175-181

0.01791483 = product of:
  0.03582966 = sum of:
    0.03582966 = product of:
      0.07165932 = sum of:
        0.07165932 = weight(_text_:technology in 899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07165932 = score(doc=899,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052224867 = queryNorm
            0.46069574 = fieldWeight in 899, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=899)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)