Search (97 results, page 1 of 5)

0.042114194 = product of:
  0.08422839 = sum of:
    0.017839102 = weight(_text_:information in 4810) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017839102 = score(doc=4810,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 4810, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4810)
    0.066389285 = weight(_text_:standards in 4810) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.066389285 = score(doc=4810,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.29545712 = fieldWeight in 4810, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4810)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

The DAISY Consortium created the first digital talking book (DTB) and this is now known worldwide as the DAISY format. The DAISY DTB is the application of existing worldwide standards used to define the next generation of information technology for people who are blind and print disabled. The acronym DAISY, digital audio-based information system, is a name both for a reading system and for the consortium of libraries, non-profit organizations and for-profit Friends of the Consortium around the world that spearhead the development of the International standard. This article will briefly trace the history of DAISY's development and go on to explain the current activities and future plans for the single worldwide standard.

0.038344346 = product of:
  0.07668869 = sum of:
    0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 1874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01029941 = score(doc=1874,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 1874, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1874)
    0.066389285 = weight(_text_:standards in 1874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.066389285 = score(doc=1874,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.29545712 = fieldWeight in 1874, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1874)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Reader awareness of article corrections can be of critical importance in the physical and biomedical sciences. Comparison of errata and corrigenda in online versions of high-impact physical sciences journals across titles and publishers yielded surprising variability. Of 43 online journals surveyed, 17 had no links between original articles and later corrections. When present, hyperlinks between articles and errata showed patterns in presentation style, but lacked consistency. Variability in the presentation, linking, and availability of online errata indicates that practices are not evenly developed across the field. Comparison of finding tools showed excellent coverage of errata by Science Citation Index, lack of indexing in INSPEC, and lack of retrieval with SciFinder Scholar. The development of standards for the linking of original articles to errata is recommended.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 54(2003) no.12, S.1153-1159

0.032388795 = product of:
  0.06477759 = sum of:
    0.0072827823 = weight(_text_:information in 1195) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0072827823 = score(doc=1195,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.08228803 = fieldWeight in 1195, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1195)
    0.057494808 = weight(_text_:standards in 1195) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.057494808 = score(doc=1195,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.25587338 = fieldWeight in 1195, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1195)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Sponsored by the German Ministry of Education and Research with funding of 800.000 EURO, the German Network of Expertise in long-term storage of digital resources (nestor) began in June 2003 as a cooperative effort of 6 partners representing different players within the field of long-term preservation. The partners include: * The German National Library (Die Deutsche Bibliothek) as the lead institution for the project * The State and University Library of Lower Saxony Göttingen (Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Göttingen) * The Computer and Media Service and the University Library of Humboldt-University Berlin (Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin) * The Bavarian State Library in Munich (Bayerische Staatsbibliothek) * The Institute for Museum Information in Berlin (Institut für Museumskunde) * General Directorate of the Bavarian State Archives (GDAB) As in other countries, long-term preservation of digital resources has become an important issue in Germany in recent years. Nevertheless, coming to agreement with institutions throughout the country to cooperate on tasks for a long-term preservation effort has taken a great deal of effort. Although there had been considerable attention paid to the preservation of physical media like CD-ROMS, technologies available for the long-term preservation of digital publications like e-books, digital dissertations, websites, etc., are still lacking. Considering the importance of the task within the federal structure of Germany, with the responsibility of each federal state for its science and culture activities, it is obvious that the approach to a successful solution of these issues in Germany must be a cooperative approach. Since 2000, there have been discussions about strategies and techniques for long-term archiving of digital information, particularly within the distributed structure of Germany's library and archival institutions. A key part of all the previous activities was focusing on using existing standards and analyzing the context in which those standards would be applied. One such activity, the Digital Library Forum Planning Project, was done on behalf of the German Ministry of Education and Research in 2002, where the vision of a digital library in 2010 that can meet the changing and increasing needs of users was developed and described in detail, including the infrastructure required and how the digital library would work technically, what it would contain and how it would be organized. The outcome was a strategic plan for certain selected specialist areas, where, amongst other topics, a future call for action for long-term preservation was defined, described and explained against the background of practical experience.
As follow up, in 2002 the nestor long-term archiving working group provided an initial spark towards planning and organising coordinated activities concerning the long-term preservation and long-term availability of digital documents in Germany. This resulted in a workshop, held 29 - 30 October 2002, where major tasks were discussed. Influenced by the demands and progress of the nestor network, the participants reached agreement to start work on application-oriented projects and to address the following topics: * Overlapping problems o Collection and preservation of digital objects (selection criteria, preservation policy) o Definition of criteria for trusted repositories o Creation of models of cooperation, etc. * Digital objects production process o Analysis of potential conflicts between production and long-term preservation o Documentation of existing document models and recommendations for standards models to be used for long-term preservation o Identification systems for digital objects, etc. * Transfer of digital objects o Object data and metadata o Transfer protocols and interoperability o Handling of different document types, e.g. dynamic publications, etc. * Long-term preservation of digital objects o Design and prototype implementation of depot systems for digital objects (OAIS was chosen to be the best functional model.) o Authenticity o Functional requirements on user interfaces of an depot system o Identification systems for digital objects, etc. At the end of the workshop, participants decided to establish a permanent distributed infrastructure for long-term preservation and long-term accessibility of digital resources in Germany comparable, e.g., to the Digital Preservation Coalition in the UK. The initial phase, nestor, is now being set up by the above-mentioned 3-year funding project.

0.028960384 = product of:
  0.05792077 = sum of:
    0.044259522 = weight(_text_:standards in 1982) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044259522 = score(doc=1982,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.19697142 = fieldWeight in 1982, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1982)
    0.013661247 = product of:
      0.027322493 = sum of:
        0.027322493 = weight(_text_:22 in 1982) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027322493 = score(doc=1982,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1982, 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=1982)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Im "Gesetz über die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek (DNBG)" vom 22. Juni 2006 erhielt die Bibliothek nicht nur den Auftrag, wie bisher Medienwerke in körperlicher Form (alle Darstellungen auf Papier, elektronischen Datenträgern und anderen Trägern), sondern auch Medienwerke in unkörperlicher Form (alle Darstellungen in öffentlichen Netzen) zu sammeln. Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek (DNB) will zu diesem Zweck zum Sommer 2008 die Pflichtablieferungsverordnung und die Sammelrichtlinien neu fassen. Diese Vorgaben sehen vor, dass die Sammlung von Online-Publikationen (im Folgenden auch: Netzpublikationen, elektronische Publikationen, E-Publikationen) in einem stufenweisen Verfahren ablaufen soll. Die DNB formulierte diese drei Schritte folgendermaßen: - Direkte Kooperation mit Ablieferern oder Kooperation mit aggregierenden Partnern hinsichtlich der Sammlung einzeln identifizierbarer Online-Publikationen. Entsprechende Verfahren wurden bereits vor Inkrafttreten des Gesetzes über die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek genutzt. Die bisherigen Erfahrungen dienen dazu, Weiterentwicklungen und Verbesserungen auf einer praktischen Basis und mittels gängiger vorhandener Standards voranzutreiben. In die Übelegungen fließen auch Möglichkeiten der Nutzung bestehender Vertriebswege einzelner Sparten ein. - Implementierung einer generell nutzbaren Schnittstelle auf der Website der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek für die Ablieferung einzeln identifizierbarer Netzpublikationen in einem standardisierten Verfahren. Diese Schnittstelle wird bereits seit einigen Jahren genutzt und derzeit für größere Ablieferungsvolumina optimiert. - Erprobung von Harvesting-Methoden für die Sammlung bzw. den Abruf definierter kleinerer oder größerer Domainbereiche. In diese Fragestellung fällt auch das Einsammeln ganzer Objektgruppen wie etwa Websites aller Bundesbehörden oder thematische Sammlungen zu besonderen nationalen Ereignissen wie Bundestagswahlen. Deutlich wird hier jedoch, dass der Prozess der Verfahrensfindung noch im Gange ist. Ebenso augenscheinlich ist, dass zwischen der freiwilligen Ablieferung von E-Publikationen durch die publizierenden Organisationen und der Sicherung ganzer Websites noch die automatisierte Sicherung der einzelnen elektronischen Publikationen von den Organisations-Websites stehen könnte und sollte. Der Download durch Bibliotheken erscheint sinnvoll, da die Ablieferung eigener E-Publikationen oft nicht selbständig durch die Organisationen erfolgt, sondern meist regelmäßig eingefordert werden muss. Hinzu kommt, dass sich der Sammelauftrag der DNB naturgemäß auf die Netzpublikationen deutscher Organisationen bezieht, nicht jedoch auf elektronische Veröffentlichungen außerdeutscher Einrichtungen,die z.B. auch für SSG- Bibliotheken mit regional oder thematisch ausgerichtet m Sammelauftrag interessant wären.

0.025562897 = product of:
  0.051125795 = sum of:
    0.006866273 = weight(_text_:information in 1901) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006866273 = score(doc=1901,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.0775819 = fieldWeight in 1901, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1901)
    0.044259522 = weight(_text_:standards in 1901) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044259522 = score(doc=1901,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.19697142 = fieldWeight in 1901, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1901)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Purpose - To explore the belief that digital technology has created a steep and irreversible decline in traditional library use, particularly in borrowing from public and higher education library print collections, with a concomitant effect on familiar patterns of reading and reflection. If digital technology has led to a fundamental change in the way young people in HE process information, should traditional assumptions about library use and educational reading habits be abandoned? Design/methodology/approach - This is a comparative analysis of statistics of library use available in the public domain in the USA and UK. Findings - That reading habits shown in the use of public libraries are arguably conservative in nature; and that recent statistics for the circulation of print stock in US and UK university libraries indisputably show year on year increases, not decreases, except where the digitisation of print originals has provided a generous supply of effective digital surrogates for print holdings. The nature of reading has not changed fundamentally in nature. But where copyright law permits large-scale provision of digital collections to be derived from print originals, these will readily displace borrowing from print collections, leading to lower circulation figures of hard copy items. Research limitations/implications - This paper asserts that the restrictive nature of UK copyright law, which is demonstrably backward by international standards, is a major factor inhibiting university teachers from helping their students migrate from print to digital media. This assertion should be researched in greater depth, with a view to using such research to influence the development of future intellectual property legislation in the UK. Practical implications - Because of the essentially conservative nature of reflective reading for educational purposes, digitisation programmes offer an important way forward for academic library service development. Library managers should not underestimate the persistent demand for traditional reading materials: where such materials are provided in digital or print formats, in most cases the digital formats will be preferred; but where high quality educational resources are only available in print, there is no evidence that the format of alternative digital media is in itself sufficient to lure students away from quality content. Originality/value - This paper questions some of the more casual assumptions about the "death" of traditional library services.

0.021761026 = product of:
  0.043522052 = sum of:
    0.02303018 = weight(_text_:information in 1871) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02303018 = score(doc=1871,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.2602176 = fieldWeight in 1871, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1871)
    0.02049187 = product of:
      0.04098374 = sum of:
        0.04098374 = weight(_text_:22 in 1871) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04098374 = score(doc=1871,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1871, 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=1871)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Chemical information sciences-ranging from subjectspecific bibliometrics to sophisticated theoretical systems for modeling structures and reactions-have historically led in developing new technologies. Hundreds of papers are published or presented at conferences annually in this discipline. One of the more significant conferences at which important research has historically been presented is the Tri-Society Symposium an Chemical Information, an event jointly sponsored by the American Chemical Society, the American Society for Information Science and Technology, and the Special Libraries Association and held every four years. Eight years ago, the theme of this conference was the chemist's workstation; papers were presented an developments enabling chemists to access and process a variety of different types of chemical information from their desktop or laboratory bench. Several of these papers were subsequently published as a Perspectives issue.

Date

19.10.2003 17:17:22

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 54(2003) no.12, S.1136-1137

0.021720288 = product of:
  0.043440577 = sum of:
    0.033194643 = weight(_text_:standards in 729) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033194643 = score(doc=729,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.14772856 = fieldWeight in 729, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=729)
    0.010245935 = product of:
      0.02049187 = sum of:
        0.02049187 = weight(_text_:22 in 729) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02049187 = score(doc=729,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 729, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=729)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

In diesem Buch sollen die grundlegenden Techniken zur Erstellung, Anwendung und nicht zuletzt Darstellung von XML-Dokumenten erklärt und demonstriert werden. Die wichtigste und vornehmste Aufgabe dieses Buches ist es jedoch, die Grundlagen von XML, wie sie vom World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) festgelegt sind, darzustellen. Das W3C hat nicht nur die Entwicklung von XML initiiert und ist die zuständige Organisation für alle XML-Standards, es werden auch weiterhin XML-Spezifikationen vom W3C entwickelt. Auch wenn immer mehr Vorschläge für neue XML-basierte Techniken aus dem weiteren Umfeld der an XML Interessierten kommen, so spielt doch weiterhin das W3C die zentrale und wichtigste Rolle für die Entwicklung von XML. Der Schwerpunkt dieses Buches liegt darin, zu lernen, wie man XML als tragende Technologie in echten Alltags-Anwendungen verwendet. Wir wollen Ihnen gute Design-Techniken vorstellen und demonstrieren, wie man XML-fähige Anwendungen mit Applikationen für das WWW oder mit Datenbanksystemen verknüpft. Wir wollen die Grenzen und Möglichkeiten von XML ausloten und eine Vorausschau auf einige "nascent"-Technologien werfen. Egal ob Ihre Anforderungen sich mehr an dem Austausch von Daten orientieren oder bei der visuellen Gestaltung liegen, dieses Buch behandelt alle relevanten Techniken. jedes Kapitel enthält ein Anwendungsbeispiel. Da XML eine Plattform-neutrale Technologie ist, werden in den Beispielen eine breite Palette von Sprachen, Parsern und Servern behandelt. Jede der vorgestellten Techniken und Methoden ist auf allen Plattformen und Betriebssystemen relevant. Auf diese Weise erhalten Sie wichtige Einsichten durch diese Beispiele, auch wenn die konkrete Implementierung nicht auf dem von Ihnen bevorzugten System durchgeführt wurde.

Date

22. 6.2005 15:12:11

0.02052752 = product of:
  0.04105504 = sum of:
    0.013732546 = weight(_text_:information in 3015) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013732546 = score(doc=3015,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 3015, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3015)
    0.027322493 = product of:
      0.054644987 = sum of:
        0.054644987 = weight(_text_:22 in 3015) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054644987 = score(doc=3015,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3015, 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=3015)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Ein Forschungsprojekt des Department Information der HAW Hamburg unter der Leitung von Rainer Klassen und Hans-Dieter Kühler hat sich aufgemacht, Licht in die Situation des wissenschaftlichen Buchmarktes in Deutschland und Europa zu bringen. Die Experten setzen sich mit den Veränderungen für das wissenschaftliche Publizieren auseinander und beleuchten die Rolle, die Hochschulen und ihre Bibliotheken in diesem Zusammenhang spielen (könnten).

Date

22. 7.2009 13:09:48

0.019363541 = product of:
  0.077454165 = sum of:
    0.077454165 = weight(_text_:standards in 4781) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.077454165 = score(doc=4781,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.34469998 = fieldWeight in 4781, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4781)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Within the library world, there is a growing interest in the use of XML in journals, not least because of its implications for e-journal archiving. But what is actually happening in the commercial journals market? How far have XML and its related standards permeated the production of real commercial journals and how do publishers and other providers of journals see this area developing? This paper looks at the activities and future plans of a selection of publishers and aggregators in the STM journals market, although many of the comments relate to the entire journals arena.

0.018446784 = product of:
  0.03689357 = sum of:
    0.019191816 = weight(_text_:information in 1634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019191816 = score(doc=1634,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.21684799 = fieldWeight in 1634, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1634)
    0.017701752 = product of:
      0.035403505 = sum of:
        0.035403505 = weight(_text_:organization in 1634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035403505 = score(doc=1634,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.19695997 = fieldWeight in 1634, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1634)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Today's publishing infrastructure is rapidly changing. As electronic journals, digital libraries, collaboratories, logic servers, and other knowledge infrastructures emerge an the internet, the key aspects of this transformation need to be identified. Knowledge is becoming increasingly dynamic and integrated. Instead of writing self-contained articles, authors are turning to the new practice of embedding their findings into dynamic networks of knowledge. Here, the author details the implications that this transformation is having an the creation, dissemination and organization of academic knowledge. The author Shows that many established publishing principles need to be given up in order to facilitate this transformation. The text provides valuable insights for knowledge managers, designers of internet-based knowledge infrastructures, and professionals in the publishing industry. Researchers will find the scenarios and implications for research processes stimulating and thought-provoking.

LCSH

Information technology

RSWK

Information Engineering / Wissensmanagement (BVB)

Subject

Information Engineering / Wissensmanagement (BVB)
Information technology

Theme

Information Resources Management

0.017528716 = product of:
  0.035057433 = sum of:
    0.014565565 = weight(_text_:information in 2757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014565565 = score(doc=2757,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 2757, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2757)
    0.02049187 = product of:
      0.04098374 = sum of:
        0.04098374 = weight(_text_:22 in 2757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04098374 = score(doc=2757,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2757, 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=2757)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

This article focuses on the process of scientific and scholarly communication. Data on open access publications on the Internet not only provides a supplement to the traditional citation indexes but also enables analysis of the microprocesses and daily practices that constitute scientific communication. This article focuses on a stage in the life cycle of scientific and scholarly information that precedes the publication of formal research articles in the scientific and scholarly literature. Binomial logistic regression models are used to analyse precise mechanisms at work in the transformation of a working paper (WP) into a journal article (JA) in the field of economics. The study unveils a fine-grained process of adapting WPs to their new context as JAs by deleting and adding literature references, which perhaps can be best captured by the term sculpting.

Date

22. 3.2009 18:59:25

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.4, S.728-739

0.017433718 = product of:
  0.034867436 = sum of:
    0.017165681 = weight(_text_:information in 1507) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017165681 = score(doc=1507,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 1507, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1507)
    0.017701752 = product of:
      0.035403505 = sum of:
        0.035403505 = weight(_text_:organization in 1507) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035403505 = score(doc=1507,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.19695997 = fieldWeight in 1507, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1507)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Discusses the factors, especially developments in information and communication technologies (ICTs) that influence the access and use of information by a person - as student at various levels. researcher, on the job, and for general purpose. Concludes that- books and libraries will continue to be with us and are in no danger of being replaced by the products and services that are ITC-based. There will be changes in the nature and size of library holdings and library services. Books of recreation and books of inspiration will continue to appear in the conventional form. Acquisition of books of information will he confined to the essentially required for continuous reading. For the other books and journals in each field, full text databases accessed online will have to be depended on. Reference hooks and costly books and journals required can he acquired in CD-ROM at a fraction of the cost of the printed versions. So the future library will be a combination of the conventional books and IT products in varying degrees or a hybrid library, depending on the types of library. The Impact of ICTs will be highest on research libraries.

Source

Knowledge organization, information systems and other essays: Professor A. Neelameghan Festschrift. Ed. by K.S. Raghavan and K.N. Prasad

0.01597681 = product of:
  0.03195362 = sum of:
    0.0042914203 = weight(_text_:information in 3768) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0042914203 = score(doc=3768,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.048488684 = fieldWeight in 3768, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3768)
    0.0276622 = weight(_text_:standards in 3768) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0276622 = score(doc=3768,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.123107135 = fieldWeight in 3768, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3768)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Content

"Menschenleer sind die asbestsanierten Gänge der Silberlaube an der Freien Universität Berlin in den Semesterferiem. Doch irgendwo im rechtwinkligen Wirrwarr zwischen Gang K und L steht eine Tür offen. Sie führt zum Büro von Katja Mruck am Fachbereich Erziehungswissenschaft und Psychologie. Die zarte Frau mit langem und dichtem Haar tritt ihren Gesprächspartnern selten persönlich gegenüber. Mit Forschungspartnern verkehrt sie meist auf elektronischem Weg - das aber umso reger. Katja Mruck ist geschäftsführende Herausgeberin der Online-Zeitschrift Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research / Foro: Investigación Social Cualitativa, kurz FQS. Der Name verweist schon auf die internationale Ausrichtung. "Überall auf der Welt arbeiten Leute an der gleichen Sache", sagt Mruck, "das ist ein Traum, wie Wissenschaft funktionieren kann." Im dreisprachigen OnlineJournal erscheinen regelmäßig wissenschaftliche Texte aus dem Bereich der qualitativen Forschung einer Methode, bei der die Forscher ihre Erkenntnisse unter anderem aus langen, tief gehende Interviews gewinnen statt standardisierte Fragebögen zu verwenden. Jeder kann sie lesen, wenn er des Englischen, Deutschen oder Spanischen mächtig ist und einen Internetzugang besitzt. Psychologen, Soziologenunf Kulturforscher arbeiten oft qualitativ: doch meist befinden sie sich damit am Rand. ihrer Disziplinen. Das war einer der Anstöß für Katja Mruck, eine gemeinsame Plattform einzurichten, um die Forschung voranzutreiben. Wichtiger war ihr aber. der internationale Ansatz, denn in anderen Ländern hat die qualitative Forschung teilweise einen höheren Stellenwert. Wenn ihr wollt, dass die Leute euch weltweit wahrnehmen, dann müsst ihr bei uns schreiben", sagt Mruck mitunter zu ihren Autoren. Durch das Feedback aus aller Welt weiß sie, dass FQS überall gelesen wird. "Weil es uns gibt, kann diese deutschsprachige Literatur nach draußen, und das Wissen von draußen kommt nach Deutschland", sagt Mruck. Nichts geht mehr ohne Qualitätssicherung. Damit das möglichwurde, kommt in FQS das Peer-Review-Verfahren zum Einsatz, bei dem zwei unabhängige externe Gutachter den Text vor der Veröffentlichung beurteilen, ohne den; Autor zu kennen. Um-gekehrt kennt auch der Autor die Gutachter. nicht: Damit wird sichergestellt, dass die Beurteilung ohne Ansehen der Person geschieht. Nur begrenzt betreibt die deutsche Sozialforschung diese aufwändige Qualitätssicherung bei Veröffentlichungen von qualitativen Forschungsergebnissen. Mruck sagt: "Ich glaube, unsere Standards sind höher als die von manchen sozialwissenschaftlichen Printzeitschriften im deutschen Raum." Zusätzlich arbeiten deutsche, englisch- und spanischsprachige Wissenschaftler finit den Autoren an den eingereichten Texten, bevor sie im Internet erscheinen. Dann stehen sie weltweit-nicht nur anderen Wissenschaftlern, sondern auch dem breiten Publikum zur Verfügung. Jeder kann seinen Kommentar dazu abgeben. Auch die Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG), die FQS fördert, hält die Qualitätssicherung für extrem wichtig. Der Leiter der Gruppe Wissenschaftliche Literaturversorgungs- und Informationssysteme der DFG, Jürgen Bunzel, ist der Meinung, "dass das Peer-Review-Verfahren letztendlich die Erfolgsbedingung der Open-Access-Bewegung" ist.
Im naturwissenschaftlichen Bereich sind Peer Reviews längst Gang und. Gäbe. Extrem teure Wissenschaftsmagazine begründen unter anderem damit oft ihre hohen Preise. Mit Open Access im Internet geht es plötzlich auch kostenlos. Das empfinden viele Wissenschaftsverlage als Affront. Einer der: geistigen Väter der Bewegung, Nobelpreisträger Harold Varmus, sagte in einem Zeit-Interview: "Es gibt Zeitschriften, die verlangen für ein institutionelles Abonnement bis zu 15.000 Dollar pro Jahr - das ist irrational, denn es behindert den Aus;tausch von Information zwischen den Forschern:" Varmus ist einer der Gründer der US-amerikanischen Public Library of Science (PLoS), die am 9. Oktober mit einem kostenlosen Biologiejournal an die Internet-Öffentlichkeit getreten ist. Die Nonprofit-Organisation verlangt das nötige Geld nicht von den Lesern, sondern von den Autoren oder den wissenschaftlichen Instituten, die durch die Veröffentlichung ihr Renommee erhöhen. Ohne Peer Review könnte PLoS Biology nicht in Konkurrenz zu den teuren Zeitschriften treten. Die wissenschaftliche Gemeinde würde die Online-Veröffentlichung nicht anerkennen. Für den freien Zugang zu den Erstveröffentlichungen nennt Varmus einleuchtende Gründe: "Der größte Teil der Wissenschaft wird durch Steuern finanziert. Deshalb sind wir der festen Überzeugung, dass die Publikationen allen zugänglich sein sollten." Zwar sind geisteswissenschaftlichen Zeitschriften noch vergleichsweise preisgünstig. Dennoch führt Klaus Graf von der Universität Freiburg auch für diesen Bereich an einem Beispiel vor Augen, dass die öffentliche Hand gleich viermal in ihre eigenen Taschen greifen muss, bis die Ergebnisse einer eingeschränkten Öffentlichkeit zur Verfügung stehen: Die Gehälter der Wissenschaftler, Reisekosten und einiges mehr zahlt der Staat. Auch die redaktionelle Überarbeitung finanziert die öffentliche Hand: Der Verlag will kostendeckend arbeiten und holt sich Druckkostenzuschüsse von öffentlichen Geldgebern dazu. Schließlich sind auch die Bibliotheken, die die Publikation anschaffen, vom Steuerzahler finanziert. Graf fasst zusammen: "Der Staat kauft seine eigenen Forschungsergebnisse zurück."

0.015648104 = product of:
  0.06259242 = sum of:
    0.06259242 = weight(_text_:standards in 1830) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06259242 = score(doc=1830,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.27855965 = fieldWeight in 1830, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1830)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Der zunehmenden Bedeutung elektronischer Bücher wurde im Bibliotheksverbund Bayern unter anderem dadurch Rechnung getragen, dass im Juli 2006 durch die Kommission für Bestandsaufbau und Lizenzen (KBL) und die Arbeitsgruppe Virtuelle Bibliothek (AVB) eine Arbeitsgruppe E-Books eingerichtet wurde. Diese AG setzt sich aus Kolleginnen und Kollegen zusammen, die ein breites Spektrum an Themenfeldern sowie verschiedene Typen wissenschaftlicher Bibliotheken repräsentieren. Ein wesentlicher Arbeitsauftrag der AG E-Books bestand in der Erstellung eines Anforderungspapiers für E-Book-Standards aus bibliothekarischer Sicht. Diese Checkliste ist in einem Wiki hinterlegt, das unter der Adresse <http://ebookstandards.ub.uni-muenchen.de/> abgerufen werden kann. An dieser Stelle findet sich auch eine ausführliche und laufend gepflegte Literaturliste zum Thema. Die Arbeitsgruppe hat den Gegenstand ihrer Untersuchung wie folgt definiert: "Unter E-Books werden im vorliegenden Kontext monographische Werke in elektronischer Form verstanden. Darunter fallen sowohl Werke, die primär elektronisch bzw. parallel zur Druckausgabe erscheinen, als auch Digitalisate. Die Bandbreite reicht hier von Nachschlagewerken über wissenschaftliche Monographien und Lehrbücher bis hin zu Dissertationen. Der Schwerpunkt liegt auf dem Umgang mit lizenzpflichtigen E-Books. Nicht behandelt wird die Hardware in Form entsprechender Lesegeräte." Auch wenn es sich bei den E-Books im hier verstandenen Sinne um ein noch relativ junges Medium handelt, mangelt es nicht an der theoretischen Beschäftigung mit dieser Thematik. Warum also die Entwicklung eines solchen Anforderungspapiers? Im Vordergrund stand zunächst die Überlegung, eine kompakte Zusammenfassung der aus Sicht der Autoren wesentlichen Aspekte der [-Book-Thematik, zumindest bezogen auf den praktischen Einsatz in wissenschaftlichen Bibliotheken, zu erstellen, um diese im konkreten Dialog mit Verlagen, Aggregatoren und Händlern bzw. zur Bewertung vorliegender Angebote einsetzen zu können. Ein zweiter Motivationsstrang war die Frage nach "dem Innovationspotential von E-Books im Kontext moderner Formen der Wissensaneignung" angesichts der gegenwärtig noch stark ausgeprägten Orientierung der E-Books am linearen Charakter gedruckter Bücher. Ob es gelingt, den vorliegenden Kriterienkatalog zu einer Plattform zu entwickeln, auf der sich neue Ideen zur Weiterentwicklung der elektronischen Bücher laufend abbilden lassen, bleibt dabei sicherlich abzuwarten. Die unter einer Reihe von Überschriften zusammengefassten Inhalte der Checkliste haben zunächst beschreibenden Charakter, in dem versucht wird, wesentliche Problemfelder in knapper Form herauszuarbeiten. Verschiedentlich werden aber darüber hinausgehend konkrete Empfehlungen ausgesprochen, die nach Auffassung der Arbeitsgruppe entweder unabdingbare Voraussetzungen darstellen oder kontextbezogen bewertet werden müssen. Im vorliegenden Beitrag sollen die Kerngedanken der Checkliste auf dem aktuell erreichten Diskussionsstand zusammenfassend dargestellt werden!

0.015395639 = product of:
  0.030791279 = sum of:
    0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 3022) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01029941 = score(doc=3022,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 3022, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3022)
    0.02049187 = product of:
      0.04098374 = sum of:
        0.04098374 = weight(_text_:22 in 3022) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04098374 = score(doc=3022,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3022, 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=3022)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Zentrale Erwerbung von wissenschaftlichen Informationsressourcen im Netz der virtuellen Hybridbibliothek der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft »Excellent Information Services for Excellent Research« ist das Motto der Anfang 2007 gegründeten Max Planck Digital Library (MPDL). Diese ambitionierte Leitlinie würdigt die Relevanz eines modernen wissenschaftlichen Informationsmanagements für eine exzellente Spitzenforschung. Mit Gründung der MPDL wurde in der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft (MPG) ein entscheidender Schritt zur zentralen Unterstützung eines bisher weitgehend dezentralen Informationsversorgungsnetzes gegangen. Die Entscheidung zu einer Kombination aus zentraler und dezentraler Informationsversorgung trägt den Veränderungen Rechnung, die sich durch die Möglichkeiten der digitalen Welt ergeben haben. Intention der Neugründung ist jedoch nicht, ein unter der Prämisse der Institutsautonomie etabliertes, wohl durchdachtes Literatur- und Informationsversorgungssystem sukzessive durch eine zentrale Einheit abzulösen, sondern gemäß der Maxime der Subsidiarität Stärken von dezentralen und von zentralen Einheiten zu einem effizienten Gesamtsystem zu ergänzen. Der vorliegende Artikel skizziert das Netz der Informationsversorgung in der MPG mit dem Schwerpunkt auf der Versorgung mit elektronischen Medien des institutsübergreifenden Bedarfs. Dieser Schwerpunkt kennzeichnet eines der Hauptarbeitsfelder der MPDL, deren weitere Services und Arbeitsfelder kontextgebunden und ausgewählt vorgestellt werden sollen?

Date

22. 7.2009 13:40:29

0.015395639 = product of:
  0.030791279 = sum of:
    0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 3662) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01029941 = score(doc=3662,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 3662, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3662)
    0.02049187 = product of:
      0.04098374 = sum of:
        0.04098374 = weight(_text_:22 in 3662) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04098374 = score(doc=3662,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3662, 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=3662)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Date

8. 7.2010 19:22:45

Source

Information science in transition, Ed.: A. Gilchrist

0.014489941 = product of:
  0.057959765 = sum of:
    0.057959765 = product of:
      0.11591953 = sum of:
        0.11591953 = weight(_text_:22 in 4823) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11591953 = score(doc=4823,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.6565931 = fieldWeight in 4823, 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=4823)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

3. 5.1997 8:44:22
18. 6.2000 9:11:22

0.013946974 = product of:
  0.027893947 = sum of:
    0.013732546 = weight(_text_:information in 5070) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013732546 = score(doc=5070,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 5070, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5070)
    0.014161401 = product of:
      0.028322803 = sum of:
        0.028322803 = weight(_text_:organization in 5070) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028322803 = score(doc=5070,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.15756798 = fieldWeight in 5070, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5070)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

This article presents the Open Access publishing experience of researchers in an academic research institution, in a developing country, Trinidad and Tobago, namely at the University of the West Indies (UWI) St. Augustine Campus. It considers UWI researchers' knowledge of Open Access, their access to the scholarly literature, Open Access Archives/Repositories at UWI and related issues of Research and Library funding and Information Communication Technology (ICT) Infrastructure/Internet connectivity. The article concludes that whilst Open Access publishing yields some obvious and well-documented benefits for developing country researchers, including free access to research articles and increased impact and visibility of "published" Open Access articles, there are some disincentives that militate against developing country researchers fully contributing to the global body of knowledge via Open Access. It finds that Open Access Journals are beneficial for scholars who consume information but are of little benefit for developing country scholars wanting to publish in these journals because of the high cost of page charges. Inadequate and unreliable ICT infrastructure and Internet connectivity also often limit access to information. It concludes that because of technical, financial, human and infrastructural limitations, Open Access via the Green Road of self-archiving is also often not an option for developing country researchers. These researchers are therefore unable to reap the real benefits, of making their research Open Access, that of increased impact and visibility.This study is to develop and evaluate methods and instruments for assessing the usability of digital libraries. It discusses the dimensions of usability, what methods have been applied in evaluating usability of digital libraries, their applicability, and criteria. It is found in the study that there exists an interlocking relationship among effectiveness, efficiency, and satisfaction. It provides operational criteria for effectiveness, efficiency, satisfaction, and learnability. It discovers users' criteria on "ease of use," "organization of information," "terminology and labeling," "visual attractiveness," and "mistake recovery." Common causes of "user lostness" were found. "Click cost" was examined.

0.0138311 = product of:
  0.0553244 = sum of:
    0.0553244 = weight(_text_:standards in 1226) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0553244 = score(doc=1226,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.24621427 = fieldWeight in 1226, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1226)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

It has been suggested that institutional e-print services will become an important way of achieving the wide availability of e-prints across a broad range of subject disciplines. However, as yet there are few exemplars of this sort of service. This paper describes how physicists make use of an established centralized subject-based e-prints service, arXiv (formerly known as the Los Alamos XXX service), and discusses the possible implications of this use for institutional multidisciplinary e-print archives. A number of key points are identified, including technical issues (such as file formats and user interface design), management issues (such as submission procedures and administrative staff support), economic issues (such as installation and support costs), quality issues (such as peer review and quality control criteria), policy issues (such as digital preservation and collection development standards), academic issues (such as scholarly communication cultures and publishing trends), and legal issues (such as copyright and intellectual property rights). These are discussed with reference to the project to set up a pilot institutional e-print service at the University of Nottingham, UK. This project is being used as a pragmatic way of investigating the issues surrounding institutional e-print services, particularly in seeing how flexible the e-prints model actually is and how easily it can adapt itself to disciplines other than physics.

0.0138311 = product of:
  0.0553244 = sum of:
    0.0553244 = weight(_text_:standards in 3615) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0553244 = score(doc=3615,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.24621427 = fieldWeight in 3615, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3615)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to explore roles of electronic texts (e-texts) in research enquiry in literary and historical studies, and to deepen the understanding of the nature of scholars' engagement with e-texts as primary materials. The study includes an investigation of references to e-texts and discussions about researchers' citation practices in interviews. Design/methodology/approach - Qualitative methodology was used to explore scholars' interactions with e-texts in 30 research projects. A combination of quantitative and qualitative methods was used to examine citations and any other acknowledgments of e-texts in participants' prepublications and published works. In-depth semi-structured interviews provided data for findings about researchers' citation practices. Findings - Formal acknowledgments of e-texts do not represent the depth and breadth of researchers' interactions with e-texts. Assessments of the relevance and trustworthiness of e-texts, as well as considerations of disciplinary cultures, had some impact on researchers' citation practices. Research limitations/implications - The study was based on in-depth data-gathering from a small group of participants. It does not have any statistical significance and the findings cannot be generalized, but comparisons with other scholars in literary and historical studies are possible. The study indicated a need for further investigation of changing academic practices in general and citation practices in particular. Practical implications - The findings have implications for the development of standards and institutional support for research in the humanities. Originality/value - The study provides new insights into the phenomenon of a very small number of citations of electronic sources in publications in the humanities, and considers issues related to citations from the perspective of changing academic cultures.