Search (56 results, page 1 of 3)

0.1053664 = product of:
  0.14048854 = sum of:
    0.01213797 = weight(_text_:information in 1154) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01213797 = score(doc=1154,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 1154, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1154)
    0.1106488 = weight(_text_:standards in 1154) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1106488 = score(doc=1154,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.49242854 = fieldWeight in 1154, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1154)
    0.017701752 = product of:
      0.035403505 = sum of:
        0.035403505 = weight(_text_:organization in 1154) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035403505 = score(doc=1154,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.19695997 = fieldWeight in 1154, 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=1154)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)

Abstract

Metasearch - also called parallel search, federated search, broadcast search, and cross-database search - has become commonplace in the information community's vocabulary. All speak to a common theme of searching and retrieving from multiple databases, sources, platforms, protocols, and vendors at the point of the user's request. Metasearch services rely on a variety of approaches including open standards (such as NISO's Z39.50 and SRU/SRW), proprietary programming interfaces, and "screen scraping." However, the absence of widely supported standards, best practices, and tools makes the metasearch environment less efficient for the metasearch provider, the content provider, and ultimately the end-user. To spur the development of widely supported standards and best practices, the National Information Standards Organization (NISO) sponsored a Metasearch Initiative in 2003 to enable: * metasearch service providers to offer more effective and responsive services, * content providers to deliver enhanced content and protect their intellectual property, and * libraries to deliver a simple search (a.k.a. "Google") that covers the breadth of their vetted commercial and free resources. The Access Management Task Group was one of three groups chartered by NISO as part of the Metasearch Initiative. The focus of the group was on gathering requirements for Metasearch authentication and access needs, inventorying existing processes, developing a series of formal use cases describing the access needs, recommending best practices given today's processes, and recommending and pursing changes to current solutions to better support metasearch applications. In September 2005, the group issued their final report and recommendation. This article summarizes the group's work and final recommendation.

0.047105446 = product of:
  0.09421089 = sum of:
    0.02102358 = weight(_text_:information in 1792) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02102358 = score(doc=1792,freq=48.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.23754507 = fieldWeight in 1792, product of:
          6.928203 = tf(freq=48.0), with freq of:
            48.0 = termFreq=48.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1792)
    0.073187314 = weight(_text_:standards in 1792) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.073187314 = score(doc=1792,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.3257109 = fieldWeight in 1792, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1792)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Specifically designed for core units in library automation and information systems, this long awaited new text gives students a comprehensive overview of one of the most critical areas of library operations. Produced by two internationally known scholars, Thomas Kochtanek and Joseph Matthews, this book will enable students to take the lead in managing an immense diversity of information resources and at the same time handle the complexities that information technology brings to the library. Giving important insight into library information systems-from the historical background to the latest technological trends and developments-the book is organized into 14 chapters, each presenting helpful information on such topics as systems design, types of systems, coverage of standards and standards organizations, technology axioms, system selection and implementation, usability of systems, library information systems management, technology trends, digital libraries, and more. New to the acclaimed Library and Information Science Text Series, this book will prove an indispensable resource to students preparing for a career in today's ever-evolving library environment. Complete with charts and illustrations, chapter summaries, suggested print and electronic resources, a glossary of terms, and an index, this text will be of central importance to libraries and library schools everywhere.

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST 54(2003) no.12, S.1166-1167 (Brenda Chawner): "Kochtanek and Matthews have written a welcome addition to the small set of introductory texts an applications of information technology to library and information Services. The book has fourteen chapters grouped into four sections: "The Broader Context," "The Technologies," "Management Issues," and "Future Considerations." Two chapters provide the broad content, with the first giving a historical overview of the development and adoption of "library information systems." Kochtanek and Matthews define this as "a wide array of solutions that previously might have been considered separate industries with distinctly different marketplaces" (p. 3), referring specifically to integrated library systems (ILS, and offen called library management systems in this part of the world), and online databases, plus the more recent developments of Web-based resources, digital libraries, ebooks, and ejournals. They characterize technology adoption patterns in libraries as ranging from "bleeding edge" to "leading edge" to "in the wedge" to "trailing edge"-this is a catchy restatement of adopter categories from Rogers' diffusion of innovation theory, where they are more conventionally known as "early adopters," "early majority," "late majority," and "laggards." This chapter concludes with a look at more general technology trends that have affected library applications, including developments in hardware (moving from mainframes to minicomputers to personal Computers), changes in software development (from in-house to packages), and developments in communications technology (from dedicated host Computers to more open networks to the current distributed environment found with the Internet). This is followed by a chapter describing the ILS and online database industries in some detail. "The Technologies" begins with a chapter an the structure and functionality of integrated library systems, which also includes a brief discussion of precision versus recall, managing access to internal documents, indexing and searching, and catalogue maintenance. This is followed by a chapter an open systems, which concludes with a useful list of questions to consider to determine an organization's readiness to adopt open source solutions. As one world expect, this section also includes a detailed chapter an telecommunications and networking, which includes types of networks, transmission media, network topologies, switching techniques (ranging from dial up and leased lines to ISDN/DSL, frame relay, and ATM). It concludes with a chapter an the role and importance of standards, which covers the need for standards and standards organizations, and gives examples of different types of standards, such as MARC, Dublin Core, Z39.50, and markup standards such as SGML, HTML, and XML. Unicode is also covered but only briefly. This section world be strengthened by a chapter an hardware concepts-the authors assume that their reader is already familiar with these, which may not be true in all cases (for example, the phrase "client-Server" is first used an page 11, but only given a brief definition in the glossary). Burke's Library Technology Companion: A Basic Guide for Library Staff (New York: Neal-Schuman, 2001) might be useful to fill this gap at an introductory level, and Saffady's Introduction to Automation for Librarians, 4th ed. (Chicago: American Library Association, 1999) world be better for those interested in more detail. The final two sections, however, are the book's real strength, with a strong focus an management issues, and this content distinguishes it from other books an this topic such as Ferguson and Hebels Computers for Librarians: an Introduction to Systems and Applications (Waggawagga, NSW: Centre for Information Studies, Charles Sturt University, 1998). ...
Though the book definitely meets a need for an up-to-date introduction to library information systems and associated management issues, and the emphasis an management issues means that it will not date too quickly, there is room for improvement. Some topics are described too briefly to be useful, such as customization/personalization, which is covered in a single paragraph, and does not mention recent developments such as the MyLibrary concept. Other topics seem to have only a peripheral connection to the main chapter theme-for example, it is surprising to find a discussion of information literacy at the end of the chapter an system selection and implementation, and the material an personalization/customization is at the end of the discussion of intranets. Despite these comments, 1 would consider using this as a textbook in an introductory course an library automation or information technology, and practitioners who want to upgrade their knowledge of current practices and issues will also find it useful. People who are primarily interested in a specific topic, such as information systems planning or system selection and implementation are likely to find more specialized books such as Planning for Integrated Systems and Technologies: A How-to-Do-It Manual for Librarians by John M. Cohn, Anne L. Kelsey, and Keith Michael Fiels (New York: Neal-Schuman, 2001) more useful."

LCSH

Library information networks
Information storage and retrieval systems
Information technology

Series

Library and information science text series

Subject

Library information networks
Information storage and retrieval systems
Information technology

0.033731185 = product of:
  0.06746237 = sum of:
    0.01213797 = weight(_text_:information in 1967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01213797 = score(doc=1967,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 1967, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1967)
    0.0553244 = weight(_text_:standards in 1967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0553244 = score(doc=1967,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.24621427 = fieldWeight in 1967, 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=1967)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

In diesem Beitrag werden Webservices als Träger für die Vernetzung unterschiedlicher Informationsangebote vorgestellt. Am Beispiel der technischen Realisierung für das Meta-Portal vascoda.de beschreibt er den Einsatz von Webservices im FIZ Karlsruhe. Erklärt werden das Konzept von Webservices, ihre Funktionsweise und die softwaretechnischen Schritte für die nahtlose Zusammenführung der teilnehmenden Webservice-Anbieter und Webservice-Nutzer. Nach Art einer Gebrauchsanweisung wird auf die in diesem Zusammenhang verwendeten Standardprotokolle und Programmiersprachen eingegangen. Webservices werden definiert als verteilte, lose gekoppelte und wiederverwendbare Software-Komponenten, die über XML-basierte Standard-Protokolle miteinander kommunizieren und auf vier wesentlichen Komponenten beruhen: dem Simple ObjectAccess Protocol (SOAP), der Webservice Description Language (WSDL), der Universal Description, Discovery and Integration (UDDI) und Standard-Internetprotkollen (HTTP[S], SMTP u.a.). Verteilte, unterschiedliche Softwaresysteme nahtlos so zusammenzuführen, dass sie sich gegenseitig verstehen und ihre Daten automatisch austauschen können, ist ein altes Ziel der Softwareentwicklung. Mit dem Konzept der Webservices scheint es sich nun verwirklichen zu lassen. Webservices bieten technisch zunächst prinzipiell nichts Neues: die Möglichkeiten, Funktionalitäten entfernter' Programme in lokale Anwendungen einzubauen, findet man seit Jahren in verschiedensten Technologien und Systemen (z.B. Remote Procedure Calls als Bestandteil von Unix, CORBA, COM, usw.). Die große Chance von Webservices liegt darin, dass sie auf akzeptierten und praktizierten Standards aufbauen und ihr relativ einfaches Konzept weithin unterstützt wird.

Source

Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 54(2003) H.7, S.421-428

Theme

Information Gateway

0.03195362 = product of:
  0.06390724 = sum of:
    0.008582841 = weight(_text_:information in 3972) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008582841 = score(doc=3972,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 3972, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3972)
    0.0553244 = weight(_text_:standards in 3972) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0553244 = score(doc=3972,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.24621427 = fieldWeight in 3972, 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=3972)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Content

"Seit zwei Jahrzehnten nutzen vor allem Bibliotheksverbünde das Protokoll Z39.50, um ihren Benutzern im Internet die simultane Abfrage mehrerer Datenbanken zu ermöglichen. Jetzt gibt es einen Nachfolger dieses Protokolls, der eine einfachere Implementierung verspricht. Damit ist auch eine größere Verbreitung für die Suche in verteilten Datenbeständen anderer Institutionen, wie z.B. Archiven und Museen, wahrscheinlich. SRW/U (Search and Retrieve Web Service bzw. Search and Retrieve URL Service, www.loc.90v/z3950/agency/zing/srw) wurde von einer an der Library of Congress angesiedelten Initiative entwickelt und beruht auf etablierten Standards wie URI und XML. Die mit SRW und SRU möglichen Abfragen und Ergebnisse unterscheiden sich nur in der Art der Übertragung, verwenden aber beide dieselben Prozeduren. Davon gibt es nur drei: explain, scan und searchRetrieve. Die beiden Erstgenannten dienen dazu, allgemeine Informationen über den Datenanbieter bzw. die verfügbaren Indexe zubekommen. Das Herzstück ist die search-Retrieve-Anweisung. Damit werden Anfragen direkt an die Datenbank gesendet und die Parameter des Suchergebnisses definiert. Verwendet wird dafür die Retrievalsprache CQL (Common Query Language), die simple Freitextsuchen, aber auch mit Boolschen Operatoren verknüpfte Recherchen ermöglicht. Bei SRU werden die Suchbefehle mittels einfacher HTTP GET -Anfragen übermittelt, die Ergebnisse in XML zurückgeliefert. Zur Strukturierung der Daten dienen z.B. Dublin Core, MARC oder EAD. Welches Format von der jeweiligen Datenbank bereitgestellt wird, kann durch die explain-Anweisung ermittelt gebracht werden."

Source

Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 56(2005) H.5/6, S.274

0.030791279 = product of:
  0.061582558 = sum of:
    0.02059882 = weight(_text_:information in 4865) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02059882 = score(doc=4865,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 4865, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4865)
    0.04098374 = product of:
      0.08196748 = sum of:
        0.08196748 = weight(_text_:22 in 4865) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08196748 = score(doc=4865,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 4865, 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=4865)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Date

22. 6.2002 19:41:59

Theme

Information Gateway

0.029003073 = product of:
  0.038670763 = sum of:
    0.009710376 = weight(_text_:information in 3964) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009710376 = score(doc=3964,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.10971737 = fieldWeight in 3964, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=3964)
    0.022129761 = weight(_text_:standards in 3964) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022129761 = score(doc=3964,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.09848571 = fieldWeight in 3964, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=3964)
    0.0068306234 = product of:
      0.013661247 = sum of:
        0.013661247 = weight(_text_:22 in 3964) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013661247 = score(doc=3964,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.07738023 = fieldWeight in 3964, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=3964)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)

Content

Enthält die Beiträge: Devadason, F.J., N. Intaraksa u. P. Patamawongjariya u.a.: Faceted indexing application for organizing and accessing internet resources; Nicholson, D., S. Wake: HILT: subject retrieval in a distributed environment; Olson, T.: Integrating LCSH and MeSH in information systems; Kuhr, P.S.: Putting the world back together: mapping multiple vocabularies into a single thesaurus; Freyre, E., M. Naudi: MACS : subject access across languages and networks; McIlwaine, I.C.: The UDC and the World Wide Web; Garrison, W.A.: The Colorado Digitization Project: subject access issues; Vizine-Goetz, D., R. Thompson: Towards DDC-classified displays of Netfirst search results: subject access issues; Godby, C.J., J. Stuler: The Library of Congress Classification as a knowledge base for automatic subject categorization: subject access issues; O'Neill, E.T., E. Childress u. R. Dean u.a.: FAST: faceted application of subject terminology; Bean, C.A., R. Green: Improving subject retrieval with frame representation; Zeng, M.L., Y. Chen: Features of an integrated thesaurus management and search system for the networked environment; Hudon, M.: Subject access to Web resources in education; Qin, J., J. Chen: A multi-layered, multi-dimensional representation of digital educational resources; Riesthuis, G.J.A.: Information languages and multilingual subject access; Geisselmann, F.: Access methods in a database of e-journals; Beghtol, C.: The Iter Bibliography: International standard subject access to medieval and renaissance materials (400-1700); Slavic, A.: General library classification in learning material metadata: the application in IMS/LOM and CDMES metadata schemas; Cordeiro, M.I.: From library authority control to network authoritative metadata sources; Koch, T., H. Neuroth u. M. Day: Renardus: Cross-browsing European subject gateways via a common classification system (DDC); Olson, H.A., D.B. Ward: Mundane standards, everyday technologies, equitable access; Burke, M.A.: Personal Construct Theory as a research tool in Library and Information Science: case study: development of a user-driven classification of photographs

Footnote

Rez. in: KO 31(2004) no.2, S.117-118 (D. Campbell): "This excellent volume offers 22 papers delivered at an IFLA Satellite meeting in Dublin Ohio in 2001. The conference gathered together information and computer scientists to discuss an important and difficult question: in what specific ways can the accumulated skills, theories and traditions of librarianship be mobilized to face the challenges of providing subject access to information in present and future networked information environments? The papers which grapple with this question are organized in a surprisingly deft and coherent way. Many conferences and proceedings have unhappy sessions that contain a hodge-podge of papers that didn't quite fit any other categories. As befits a good classificationist, editor I.C. McIlwaine has kept this problem to a minimum. The papers are organized into eight sessions, which split into two broad categories. The first five sessions deal with subject domains, and the last three deal with subject access tools. The five sessions and thirteen papers that discuss access in different domains appear in order of in creasing intension. The first papers deal with access in multilingual environments, followed by papers an access across multiple vocabularies and across sectors, ending up with studies of domain-specific retrieval (primarily education). Some of the papers offer predictably strong work by scholars engaged in ongoing, long-term research. Gerard Riesthuis offers a clear analysis of the complexities of negotiating non-identical thesauri, particularly in cases where hierarchical structure varies across different languages. Hope Olson and Dennis Ward use Olson's familiar and welcome method of using provocative and unconventional theory to generate meliorative approaches to blas in general subject access schemes. Many papers, an the other hand, deal with specific ongoing projects: Renardus, The High Level Thesaurus Project, The Colorado Digitization Project and The Iter Bibliography for medieval and Renaissance material. Most of these papers display a similar structure: an explanation of the theory and purpose of the project, an account of problems encountered in the implementation, and a discussion of the results, both promising and disappointing, thus far. Of these papers, the account of the Multilanguage Access to Subjects Project in Europe (MACS) deserves special mention. In describing how the project is founded an the principle of the equality of languages, with each subject heading language maintained in its own database, and with no single language used as a pivot for the others, Elisabeth Freyre and Max Naudi offer a particularly vivid example of the way the ethics of librarianship translate into pragmatic contexts and concrete procedures. The three sessions and nine papers devoted to subject access tools split into two kinds: papers that discuss the use of theory and research to generate new tools for a networked environment, and those that discuss the transformation of traditional subject access tools in this environment. In the new tool development area, Mary Burke provides a promising example of the bidirectional approach that is so often necessary: in her case study of user-driven classification of photographs, she user personal construct theory to clarify the practice of classification, while at the same time using practice to test the theory. Carol Bean and Rebecca Green offer an intriguing combination of librarianship and computer science, importing frame representation technique from artificial intelligence to standardize syntagmatic relationships to enhance recall and precision.
The papers discussing the transformation of traditional tools locate the point of transformation in different places. Some, like the papers an DDC, LCC and UDC, suggest that these schemes can be imported into the networked environment and used as a basis for improving access to networked resources, just as they improve access to physical resources. While many of these papers are intriguing, I suspect that convincing those outside the profession will be difficult. In particular, Edward O'Neill and his colleagues, while offering a fascinating suggestion for preserving the Library of Congress Subject Headings and their associated infrastructure by converting them into a faceted scheme, will have an uphill battle convincing the unconverted that LCSH has a place in the online networked environment. Two papers deserve mention for taking a different approach: both Francis Devadason and Maria Ines Cordeiro suggest that we import concepts and techniques rather than realized schemes. Devadason argues for the creation of a faceted pre-coordinate indexing scheme for Internet resources based an Deep Structure indexing, which originates in Bhattacharyya's Postulate-Based Permuted Subject Indexing and in Ranganathan's chain indexing techniques. Cordeiro takes up the vitally important role of authority control in Web environments, suggesting that the techniques of authority control be expanded to enhance user flexibility. By focusing her argument an the concepts rather than an the existing tools, and by making useful and important distinctions between library and non-library uses of authority control, Cordeiro suggests that librarianship's contribution to networked access has less to do with its tools and infrastructure, and more to do with concepts that need to be boldly reinvented. The excellence of this collection derives in part from the energy, insight and diversity of the papers. Credit also goes to the planning and forethought that went into the conference itself by OCLC, the IFLA Classification and Indexing Section, the IFLA Information Technology Section, and the Program Committee, headed by editor I.C. McIlwaine. This collection avoids many of the problems of conference proceedings, and instead offers the best of such proceedings: detail, diversity, and judicious mixtures of theory and practice. Some of the disadvantages that plague conference proceedings appear here. Busy scholars sometimes interpret the concept of "camera-ready copy" creatively, offering diagrams that could have used some streamlining, and label boxes that cut off the tops or bottoms of letters. The papers are necessarily short, and many of them raise issues that deserve more extensive treatment. The issue of subject access in networked environments is crying out for further synthesis at the conceptual and theoretical level. But no synthesis can afford to ignore the kind of energetic, imaginative and important work that the papers in these proceedings represent."

0.027849235 = product of:
  0.05569847 = sum of:
    0.03179129 = weight(_text_:information in 4866) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03179129 = score(doc=4866,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.3592092 = fieldWeight in 4866, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4866)
    0.023907183 = product of:
      0.047814365 = sum of:
        0.047814365 = weight(_text_:22 in 4866) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047814365 = score(doc=4866,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4866, 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=4866)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Information subject gateways provide targeted discovery services for their users, giving access to Web resources selected according to quality and subject coverage criteria. Information gateways recognise that they must collaborate on a wide range of issues relating to content to ensure continued success. This report is informed by discussion of content activities at the 1999 Imesh Workshop. The author considers the implications for subject based gateways of co-operation regarding coverage policy, creation of metadata, and provision of searching and browsing across services. Other possibilities for co-operation include working more closely with information providers, and diclosure of information in joint metadata registries

Date

22. 6.2002 19:38:54

Source

Online information review. 24(2000) no.1, S.40-45

Theme

Information Gateway

0.022129761 = product of:
  0.088519044 = sum of:
    0.088519044 = weight(_text_:standards in 4980) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.088519044 = score(doc=4980,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.39394283 = fieldWeight in 4980, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4980)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Integration der Navigation und Suche in lizenzierten Journalen und gleichzeitig in freien digitalen Dokumenten unter einer einheitlichen konsistenten Nutzeroberflache ist eines der ungelösten F&E-Probleme der Fachinformation. Hierbei müssen Elemente des Invisible Web und des Visible Web unter Berücksichtigung offener Standards nahtlos miteinander verbunden werden. Der Artikel beschreibt Ausgangspunkt und Entwicklungsgeschichte eines kooperativen Vorhabens "Verteilter Zeitschriftenserver", das sich auf dem Wege über eine Generalisierung zum "Verteilten Dokumentenserver" zur Basis der Kooperation von vascoda und AGVerbund mit dem Ziel der Realisierung einer Offenen Digitalen Bibliothek der Wissenschaften entwickelte.

0.019363541 = product of:
  0.077454165 = sum of:
    0.077454165 = weight(_text_:standards in 5813) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.077454165 = score(doc=5813,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.34469998 = fieldWeight in 5813, 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=5813)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

In diesem Kapitel werden Anwendungsgebiete und Ansätze für die semantische Beschreibung von Web Services behandelt. Bestehende Web Service Technologien leisten einen entscheidenden Beitrag zur Entwicklung verteilter Anwendungen dadurch, dass weithin akzeptierte Standards vorliegen, die die Kommunikation zwischen Anwendungen bestimmen und womit deren Kombination zu komplexeren Einheiten ermöglicht wird. Automatisierte Mechanismen zum Auffinden geeigneter Web Services und deren Komposition dagegen werden von bestehenden Technologien in vergleichsweise geringem Maß unterstützt. Ähnlich wie bei der Annotation statischer Daten im "Semantic Web" setzen Forschung und Industrie große Hoffnungen in die semantische Beschreibung von Web Services zur weitgehenden Automatisierung dieser Aufgaben.

0.019165486 = product of:
  0.038330972 = sum of:
    0.017839102 = weight(_text_:information in 5589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017839102 = score(doc=5589,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 5589, 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=5589)
    0.02049187 = product of:
      0.04098374 = sum of:
        0.04098374 = weight(_text_:22 in 5589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04098374 = score(doc=5589,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5589, 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=5589)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Der vollständige Projektname von Renardus lautet "Academic Subject Gateway Service Europe". Renardus wird von der Europäischen Union im 5. Rahmenprogramm mit dem Schwerpunktthema "Information Society Technologies" im zweiten Thematischen Programm "Benutzerfreundliche Informationsgesellschaft" ('Promoting a User-friendly Information Society') gefördert. Die Projektlaufzeit ist von Januar 2000 bis Juni 2002. Insgesamt zwölf Partner (Principal und Assistant Contractors) aus Finnland, Dänemark, Schweden, Großbritannien, den Niederlanden, Frankreich und Deutschland beteiligen sich an diesem Projekt. Die Europäische Union unterstützt das Projekt mit 1,7 Mio. EURO, die Gesamtkosten belaufen sich inklusive der Eigenbeteiligungen der Partner auf 2,3 Mio. EURO. Das Ziel des Projektes Renardus ist es, über eine Schnittstelle Zugriff auf verteilte Sammlungen von "High Quality" Internet Ressourcen in Europa zu ermöglichen. Diese Schnittstelle wird über den Renardus Broker realisiert, der das "Cross-Searchen" und "Cross-Browsen" über verteilte "Quality-Controlled Subject Gateways" ermöglicht. Ein weiteres Ziel von Renardus ist es, Möglichkeiten von "metadata sharing" zu evaluieren und in kleinen Experimenten zwischen z. B. Subject Gateways und Nationalbibliothek zu testen bzw. zu realisieren

Date

22. 6.2002 19:32:15

Theme

Information Gateway

0.01905007 = product of:
  0.03810014 = sum of:
    0.02102358 = weight(_text_:information in 6959) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02102358 = score(doc=6959,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.23754507 = fieldWeight in 6959, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6959)
    0.01707656 = product of:
      0.03415312 = sum of:
        0.03415312 = weight(_text_:22 in 6959) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03415312 = score(doc=6959,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 6959, 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=6959)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

The success of the World Wide Web Shows that we can access, search, and retrieve information from globally distributed databases. lf a database, such as a library catalog, has some sort of Web-based front end, we can type its URL into a Web browser and use its HTML-based forms to search for items in that database. Depending an how well the query conforms to the database content, how the search engine interprets the query, and how the server formats the results into HTML, we might actually find something usable. While the first two issues depend an ourselves and the server, an the Web the latter falls to the mercy of HTML, which we all know as a great destroyer of information because it codes for display but not for content description. When looking at an HTML-formatted display, we must depend an our own interpretation to recognize such entities as author names, titles, and subject identifiers. The Web browser can do nothing but display the information. lf we want some other view of the result, such as sorting the records by date (provided it offers such an option to begin with), the server must do it. This makes poor use of the computing power we have at the desktop (or even laptop), which, unless it involves retrieving more records, could easily do the result Set manipulation that we currently send back to the server. Despite having personal computers wich immense computational power, as far as information retrieval goes, we still essentially use them as dumb terminals.

Date

22. 9.1997 19:16:05

Imprint

Urbana-Champaign, IL : Illinois University at Urbana-Champaign, Graduate School of Library and Information Science

0.018143935 = product of:
  0.03628787 = sum of:
    0.01213797 = weight(_text_:information in 5801) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01213797 = score(doc=5801,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 5801, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5801)
    0.0241499 = product of:
      0.0482998 = sum of:
        0.0482998 = weight(_text_:22 in 5801) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0482998 = score(doc=5801,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 5801, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5801)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Date

22. 6.2002 19:42:22

Source

Information Research & Content Management: Orientierung, Ordnung und Organisation im Wissensmarkt; 23. DGI-Online-Tagung der DGI und 53. Jahrestagung der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Informationswissenschaft und Informationspraxis e.V. DGI, Frankfurt am Main, 8.-10.5.2001. Proceedings. Hrsg.: R. Schmidt

Theme

Information Gateway

0.017528716 = product of:
  0.035057433 = sum of:
    0.014565565 = weight(_text_:information in 5271) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014565565 = score(doc=5271,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 5271, 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=5271)
    0.02049187 = product of:
      0.04098374 = sum of:
        0.04098374 = weight(_text_:22 in 5271) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04098374 = score(doc=5271,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5271, 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=5271)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Federated search and distributed information retrieval systems provide a single user interface for searching multiple full-text search engines. They have been an active area of research for more than a decade, but in spite of their success as a research topic, they are still rare in operational environments. This article discusses a prototype federated search system developed for the U.S. government's FedStats Web portal, and the issues addressed in adapting research solutions to this operational environment. A series of experiments explore how well prior research results, parameter settings, and heuristics apply in the FedStats environment. The article concludes with a set of lessons learned from this technology transfer effort, including observations about search engine quality in the real world.

Date

22. 7.2006 16:02:07

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.3, S.347-358

0.017528716 = product of:
  0.035057433 = sum of:
    0.014565565 = weight(_text_:information in 5974) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014565565 = score(doc=5974,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 5974, 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=5974)
    0.02049187 = product of:
      0.04098374 = sum of:
        0.04098374 = weight(_text_:22 in 5974) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04098374 = score(doc=5974,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5974, 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=5974)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Date

1. 9.2006 13:22:15

Source

Effektive Information Retrieval Verfahren in Theorie und Praxis: ausgewählte und erweiterte Beiträge des Vierten Hildesheimer Evaluierungs- und Retrievalworkshop (HIER 2005), Hildesheim, 20.7.2005. Hrsg.: T. Mandl u. C. Womser-Hacker

Theme

Information Gateway

0.017364673 = product of:
  0.034729347 = sum of:
    0.0034331365 = weight(_text_:information in 2789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0034331365 = score(doc=2789,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.03879095 = fieldWeight in 2789, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2789)
    0.03129621 = weight(_text_:standards in 2789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03129621 = score(doc=2789,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.13927983 = fieldWeight in 2789, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2789)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Content

"... unter diesem Motto hat die Deutsche Bücherei Leipzig am 23. März 2004 auf dem Leipziger Kongress für Bibliothek und Information eine Vortragsreihe initiiert. Vorgestellt wurden Projekte, die sich im Spannungsfeld von Standardisierung und Heterogenität der Sacherschließung bewegen. Die Benutzer unserer Bibliotheken und Informationseinrichtungen stehen heute einer Fülle von Informationen gegenüber, die sie aus zahlreichen Katalogen und Fachdatenbanken abfragen können. Diese Recherche kann schnell zeitraubend werden, wenn der Benutzer mit verschiedenen Suchbegriffen und -logiken arbeiten muss, um zur gewünschten Ressource zu gelangen. Ein Schlagwort A kann in jedem der durchsuchten Systeme eine andere Bedeutung annehmen. Homogenität erreicht man klassisch zunächst durch Normierung und Standardisierung. Für die zwei traditionellen Verfahren der inhaltlichen Erschließung - der klassifikatorischen und der verbalen - haben sich in Deutschland verschiedene Standards durchgesetzt. Klassifikatorische Erschließung wird mit ganz unterschiedlichen Systemen betrieben. Verbreitet sind etwa die Regensburger Verbundklassifikation (RVK) oder die Basisklassifikation (BK). Von Spezial- und Facheinrichtungen werden entsprechende Fachklassifikationen eingesetzt. Weltweit am häufigsten angewandt ist die Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), die seit 2003 ins Deutsche übertragen wird. Im Bereich der verbalen Sacherschließung haben sich, vor allem bei den wissenschaftlichen Universalbibliotheken, die Regeln für den Schlagwortkatalog (RSWK) durchgesetzt, durch die zugleich die Schlagwortnormdatei (SWD) kooperativ aufgebaut wurde. Daneben erschließen wiederum viele Spezial- und Facheinrichtungen mit selbst entwickelten Fachthesauri.
Neben die Pflege der Standards tritt als Herausforderung die Vernetzung der Systeme, um heterogene Dokumentenbestände zu verbinden. »Standardisierung muss von der verbleibenden Heterogenität her gedacht werden«." Diese Aufgaben können nur in Kooperation von Bibliotheken und Informationseinrichtungen gelöst werden. Die vorgestellten Projekte zeigen, wie dies gelingen kann. Sie verfolgen alle das Ziel, Informationen über Inhalte schneller und besser für die Nutzer zur Verfügung zu stellen. Fachliche Recherchen über mehrere Informationsanbieter werden durch die Heterogenität überwindende Suchdienste ermöglicht. Die Einführung der DDC im deutschen Sprachraum steht genau im Kern des Spannungsfeldes. Die DDC stellt durch ihren universalen Charakter nicht nur einen übergreifenden Standard her. Ihre Anwendung ist nur nutzbringend, wenn zugleich die Vernetzung mit den in Deutschland bewährten Klassifikationen und Thesauri erfolgt. Ziel des Projektes DDC Deutsch ist nicht nur eine Übersetzung ins Deutsche, die DDC soll auch in Form elektronischer Dienste zur Verfügung gestellt werden. Dr. Lars Svensson, Deutsche Bibliothek Frankfurt am Main, präsentierte anschaulichdie Möglichkeiten einer intelligenten Navigation über die DDC. Für die Dokumentenbestände Der Deutschen Bibliothek, des Gemeinsamen Bibliotheksverbundes (GBV) und der Niedersächsischen Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Göttingen wurde prototypisch ein Webservice realisiert.

0.01595999 = product of:
  0.03191998 = sum of:
    0.011892734 = weight(_text_:information in 2769) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011892734 = score(doc=2769,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.1343758 = fieldWeight in 2769, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2769)
    0.020027246 = product of:
      0.040054493 = sum of:
        0.040054493 = weight(_text_:organization in 2769) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040054493 = score(doc=2769,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.22283478 = fieldWeight in 2769, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2769)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

The paper will explore the issues surrounding the development of an evaluation framework for a supranational digital library system, as seen through the TEL (The European Library) project. It will describe work an the project to date, and seek to establish what are the key drivers, priorities and barriers encountered, in developing such a framework. TEL is being funded by the EU as an Accompanying Measure in the IST program. Its main focus of is an consensus building, and also includes preparatory technical work to develop testbeds, which will gauge to what extent interoperability is achievable. In order for TEL to take its place as a major Information Society initiative of the EU, it needs to be closely attuned to the needs, expectations and realities of its user communities, which comprise the citizens of the project's national partners. To this end the evaluation framework described in this paper, is being developed by establishing the users' viewpoints and priorities in relation to the key project themes. A summary of the issues to be used in the baseline, and to be expanded upon in the paper, follows: - Establishing the differing contexts of the national library partners, and the differing national priorities which will impact an TEL - Exploring the differing expectations relating to building and using the hybrid library - Exploring the differing expectations relating to TEL. TEL needs to add value - what does this mean in each partner state, and for the individuals within them? 1. Introduction to TEL TEL (The European Library) is a thirty month project, funded by the European Commission as part of its Fifth Framework Programme for research. It aims to set up a co-operative framework for access to the major national, mainly digital, collections in European national libraries. TEL is funded as an Accompanying Measure, designed to support the work of the IST (Information Society Technologies) Programme an the development of access to cultural and scientific knowledge. TEL will stop short of becoming a live service during the lifetime of the project, and is focused an ensuring co-operative and concerted approaches to technical and business issues associated with large-scale content development. It will lay the policy and technical groundwork towards a pan European digital library based an distributed digital collections, and providing seamless access to the digital resources of major European national libraries. It began in February, 2001, and has eight national library partners: Finland, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, Slovenia, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. It is also seeking to encourage the participation of all European national libraries in due course.

Series

Advances in knowledge organization; vol.8

Source

Challenges in knowledge representation and organization for the 21st century: Integration of knowledge across boundaries. Proceedings of the 7th ISKO International Conference Granada, Spain, July 10-13, 2002. Ed.: M. López-Huertas

Theme

Information Gateway

0.008919551 = product of:
  0.035678204 = sum of:
    0.035678204 = weight(_text_:information in 4694) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.035678204 = score(doc=4694,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.40312737 = fieldWeight in 4694, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4694)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Journal of information science. 29(2003) no.5, S.357-374

0.008298661 = product of:
  0.033194643 = sum of:
    0.033194643 = weight(_text_:standards in 4097) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033194643 = score(doc=4097,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.14772856 = fieldWeight in 4097, 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=4097)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

Überblick über die Kapitel In Kapitel l. Simple Object Acces Protocol (SOAP) wird zuerst der Hintergrund der Entwicklung von SOAP untersucht. Mit einer kurzen Vorstellung der Entwicklung von verteilter Anwendung bis Web Service wird die Situation dargestellt, dass die vorhandenen Standards wie CORBA, DCOM sowie RMI die Ansprüche der stark heterogenen Umgebung wie Internet nicht erfüllen können. Um diesen Mangel der vorhandenen Lösungen zu überwinden, wurde SOAP mit dem Ziel der Unterstützung des plattformenunabhängigen Nachrichtenaustausches entwickelt. Anschließend wird der Begriff Web Service eingeführt, mit dem SOAP stark verbunden ist. Dabei wird über die Möglichkeit des Einsatzes von SOAP in den Bibliothekssystemen diskutiert. Schließlich wird SOAP durch unterschiedliche Aspekte wie SOAP und XML, SOAP Nachricht, Fehler Behandlung usw. untersucht. In Kapitel 3. Die durch Internet erweiterte Bibliothek wird die Beziehung zwischen dem Internet und der Bibliothek aus zwei Sichten, die verteilte Suche und Metadaten, beschrieben. In dem Teil über die verteilte Suche wird vorwiegend das Protokoll Z39.50, womit die bisherigen verteilten Bibliothekssysteme realisiert werden, dargestellt. In dem Teil der Metadaten wird sich zuerst mit der Bedeutung der Metadaten für die Bibliothek sowie für das Internet auseinandergesetzt. Anschließend wird über die existierenden Probleme der Metadaten und die Lösungsmöglichkeiten diskutiert. Schließlich wird eine Untersuchung einiger Metadatenstandards mit Dublin Core als Schwerpunkt durchgeführt, weil Dublin Core zur Zeit der Standard für das Internet und aus diesem Grund auch fir die Internet bezogene Bibliotheksanwendung wichtig ist. In Kapitel 4. Die Entwicklung eines verteilten Bibliothekssystems mit dem SOAP-Einsatz wird die Entwicklung des praktischen Projektes beschrieben. Zuerst wird das Ziel und die Funktionalität des Projektes festgelegt, dass ein verteiltes Bibliothekssystem mit dem Einsatz von SOAP entwickelt wird und das System eine verteilte Suche auf mehreren entfernten Bibliotheksdatenbanken ermöglichen soll. Anschließend wird beschrieben, in welchen Schritten das System entworfen und implementiert wird. Mit dem ersten System kann man nur in einer Datenbank suchen, während man mit dem zweiten System parallel in zwei Datenbanken suchen kann. Dublin Core wird als der Metadatenstandard im gesamten System eingesetzt. Die im System verwendeten Softwarepakete und die Softwarestandardtechnologien werden vorgestellt. Es wird untersucht, wie einzelne technische Komponenten zusammenarbeiten. Schließlich wird die Entwicklung der einzelnen Programmmodule und die Kommunikation zwischen ihnen beschrieben.

0.0073582535 = product of:
  0.029433014 = sum of:
    0.029433014 = weight(_text_:information in 31) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029433014 = score(doc=31,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.3325631 = fieldWeight in 31, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=31)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

A multi-database model of distributed information retrieval is presented, in which people are assumed to have access to many searchable text databases. In such an environment, full-text information retrieval consists of discovering database contents, ranking databases by their expected ability to satisfy the query, searching a small number of databases, and merging results returned by different databases. This paper presents algorithms for each task. It also discusses how to reorganize conventional test collections into multi-database testbeds, and evaluation methodologies for multi-database experiments. A broad and diverse group of experimental results is presented to demonstrate that the algorithms are effective, efficient, robust, and scalable

Series

The Kluwer international series on information retrieval; 7

Source

Advances in information retrieval: Recent research from the Center for Intelligent Information Retrieval. Ed.: W.B. Croft

0.0072827823 = product of:
  0.02913113 = sum of:
    0.02913113 = weight(_text_:information in 4041) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02913113 = score(doc=4041,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.3291521 = fieldWeight in 4041, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4041)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)