Search (63 results, page 1 of 4)

0.16962564 = product of:
  0.25443846 = sum of:
    0.10266554 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 6040) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10266554 = score(doc=6040,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.5161496 = fieldWeight in 6040, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6040)
    0.15177292 = sum of:
      0.06870447 = weight(_text_:classification in 6040) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06870447 = score(doc=6040,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051092815 = queryNorm
          0.42223644 = fieldWeight in 6040, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6040)
      0.08306845 = weight(_text_:22 in 6040) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08306845 = score(doc=6040,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17891833 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051092815 = queryNorm
          0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6040, 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=6040)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Date

22. 6.2002 19:42:47

Source

International cataloguing and bibliographic control. 29(2000) no.3, S.45-48

0.070724726 = product of:
  0.10608709 = sum of:
    0.08891097 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5851) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08891097 = score(doc=5851,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.44699866 = fieldWeight in 5851, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5851)
    0.017176118 = product of:
      0.034352235 = sum of:
        0.034352235 = weight(_text_:classification in 5851) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034352235 = score(doc=5851,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 5851, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5851)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

This paper discusses how the AustLit: Australian Literature Gateway's interpretation, enhancement and implementation of the International Federation of Library Association's Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR Final Report 1998) model is meeting the needs of Australian literature scholars for accurate bibliographic representation of the histories of literary texts. It also explores how the AustLit Gateway's underpinning research principles, which are based on the tradition of scholarly enumerative and descriptive bibliography, with enhancements from analytical bibliography and literary biography, have impacted upon our implementation of the FRBR model. The major enhancement or alteration to the model is the use of enhanced manifestations, which allow the full representation of all agents' contributions to be shown in a highly granular format by enabling creation events to be incorporated at all levels of the Work, Expression and Manifestation nexus.

Series

Cataloging and classification quarterly; 39, nos.3/4

Source

Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR): hype or cure-all. Ed. by P. le Boeuf,

0.041494496 = product of:
  0.062241744 = sum of:
    0.048397 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1447) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.048397 = score(doc=1447,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.24331525 = fieldWeight in 1447, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1447)
    0.013844742 = product of:
      0.027689485 = sum of:
        0.027689485 = weight(_text_:22 in 1447) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027689485 = score(doc=1447,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17891833 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1447, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1447)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

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

Date

21. 4.2002 10:22:31

0.040055495 = product of:
  0.06008324 = sum of:
    0.04277731 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2891) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04277731 = score(doc=2891,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.21506234 = fieldWeight in 2891, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2891)
    0.017305927 = product of:
      0.034611855 = sum of:
        0.034611855 = weight(_text_:22 in 2891) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034611855 = score(doc=2891,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17891833 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2891, 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=2891)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine user tags that describe digitized archival collections in the field of humanities. A collection of 8,310 tags from a digital portal (Nineteenth-Century Electronic Scholarship, NINES) was analyzed to find out what attributes of primary historical resources users described with tags. Tags were categorized to identify which tags describe the content of the resource, the resource itself, and subjective aspects (e.g., usage or emotion). The study's findings revealed that over half were content-related; tags representing opinion, usage context, or self-reference, however, reflected only a small percentage. The study further found that terms related to genre or physical format of a resource were frequently used in describing primary archival resources. It was also learned that nontextual resources had lower numbers of content-related tags and higher numbers of document-related tags than textual resources and bibliographic materials; moreover, textual resources tended to have more user-context-related tags than other resources. These findings help explain users' tagging behavior and resource interpretation in primary resources in the humanities. Such information provided through tags helps information professionals decide to what extent indexing archival and cultural resources should be done for resource description and discovery, and understand users' terminology.

Date

21. 4.2016 11:23:22

0.033727318 = product of:
  0.10118195 = sum of:
    0.10118195 = sum of:
      0.045802977 = weight(_text_:classification in 4869) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.045802977 = score(doc=4869,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051092815 = queryNorm
          0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 4869, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4869)
      0.05537897 = weight(_text_:22 in 4869) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05537897 = score(doc=4869,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17891833 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051092815 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4869, 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=4869)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This article gives an overview of the design and organisation of DutchESS, a Dutch information subject gateway created as a national collaborative effort of the National Library and a number of academic libraries. The combined centralised and distributed model of DutchESS is discussed, as well as its selection policy, its metadata format, classification scheme and retrieval options. Also some options for future collaboration on an international level are explored

Date

22. 6.2002 19:39:23

0.029511403 = product of:
  0.088534206 = sum of:
    0.088534206 = sum of:
      0.040077604 = weight(_text_:classification in 631) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.040077604 = score(doc=631,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051092815 = queryNorm
          0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 631, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=631)
      0.048456598 = weight(_text_:22 in 631) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.048456598 = score(doc=631,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17891833 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051092815 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 631, 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=631)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

'Quality-controlled subject gateways' are Internet services which apply a rich set of quality measures to support systematic resource discovery. Considerable manual effort is used to secure a selection of resources which meet quality criteria and to display a rich description of these resources with standards-based metadata. Regular checking and updating ensure good collection management. A main goal is to provide a high quality of subject access through indexing resources using controlled vocabularies and by offering a deep classification structure for advanced searching and browsing. This article provides an initial empirical overview of existing services of this kind, their approaches and technologies, based on proposed working definitions and typologies of subject gateways

Date

22. 6.2002 19:37:55

0.025295487 = product of:
  0.07588646 = sum of:
    0.07588646 = sum of:
      0.034352235 = weight(_text_:classification in 2199) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034352235 = score(doc=2199,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051092815 = queryNorm
          0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 2199, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2199)
      0.041534226 = weight(_text_:22 in 2199) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041534226 = score(doc=2199,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17891833 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051092815 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2199, 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=2199)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 2.2009 19:11:35

Source

New pespectives on subject indexing and classification: essays in honour of Magda Heiner-Freiling. Red.: K. Knull-Schlomann, u.a

0.024198502 = product of:
  0.07259551 = sum of:
    0.07259551 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 3383) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07259551 = score(doc=3383,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.3649729 = fieldWeight in 3383, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3383)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The initial research on semantic digital libraries resulted in the design and implementation of JeromeDL; current research on online social networking and information discovery delivered new sets of features that were implemented in JeromeDL. Eventually, this digital library has been redesigned to follow the architecture of a social semantic digital library. JeromeDL describes each resource using three types of metadata: structure, bibliographic and community. It delivers services leveraging each of these information types. Annotations based on the structure and legacy metadata, and bibliographic ontology are rendered to the users in one, mixed, representation of library resources. Community annotations are managed by separate services, such as social semantic collaborative filtering or blogging component

0.022814568 = product of:
  0.0684437 = sum of:
    0.0684437 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1468) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0684437 = score(doc=1468,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.34409973 = fieldWeight in 1468, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1468)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Footnote

Rez. in: International cataloguing and bibliographic control 30(2001) no.3, S.59 (I.C. McIlwaine)

0.016316187 = product of:
  0.048948556 = sum of:
    0.048948556 = product of:
      0.09789711 = sum of:
        0.09789711 = weight(_text_:22 in 4872) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09789711 = score(doc=4872,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17891833 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 4872, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4872)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 6.2002 19:40:22

0.0161522 = product of:
  0.048456598 = sum of:
    0.048456598 = product of:
      0.096913196 = sum of:
        0.096913196 = weight(_text_:22 in 6483) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.096913196 = score(doc=6483,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17891833 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6483, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6483)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 6.2002 19:43:01

0.013844742 = product of:
  0.041534226 = sum of:
    0.041534226 = product of:
      0.08306845 = sum of:
        0.08306845 = weight(_text_:22 in 4865) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08306845 = score(doc=4865,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17891833 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = 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)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 6.2002 19:41:59

0.013359202 = product of:
  0.040077604 = sum of:
    0.040077604 = product of:
      0.08015521 = sum of:
        0.08015521 = weight(_text_:classification in 5782) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08015521 = score(doc=5782,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.49260917 = fieldWeight in 5782, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5782)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Library and Archives Canada (LAC) has capitalized on the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) potential for organizing Web resources in two projects. Since 1995, LAC has been providing a service that offers links to authoritative Web resources about Canada categorized according to the DDC via its Web site. More recently, LAC has partnered with the federal government Department of Canadian Heritage to manage Web content related to Canadian culture in a DDC-based subject tree. Although the DDC works well to organize a broadly-based collection, challenges have been encountered in adapting it for a specific subject domain.

Footnote

Beitrag in einem Themenheft "Moving beyond the presentation layer: content and context in the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) System"

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 42(2006) nos.3/4, S.201-211

0.013222182 = product of:
  0.039666545 = sum of:
    0.039666545 = product of:
      0.07933309 = sum of:
        0.07933309 = weight(_text_:classification in 2760) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07933309 = score(doc=2760,freq=24.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.48755667 = fieldWeight in 2760, product of:
              4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
                24.0 = termFreq=24.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2760)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Special classifications have been somewhat neglected in KO compared to general classifications. The methodology of constructing special classifications is important, however, also for the methodology of constructing general classification schemes. The methodology of constructing special classifications can be regarded as one among about a dozen approaches to domain analysis. The methodology of (special) classification in LIS has been dominated by the rationalistic facet-analytic tradition, which, however, neglects the question of the empirical basis of classification. The empirical basis is much better grasped by, for example, bibliometric methods. Even the combination of rational and empirical methods is insufficient. This presentation will provide evidence for the necessity of historical and pragmatic methods for the methodology of classification and will point to the necessity of analyzing "paradigms". The presentation covers the methods of constructing classifications from Ranganathan to the design of ontologies in computer science and further to the recent "paradigm shift" in classification research. 1. Introduction Classification of a subject field is one among about eleven approaches to analyzing a domain that are specific for information science and in my opinion define the special competencies of information specialists (Hjoerland, 2002a). Classification and knowledge organization are commonly regarded as core qualifications of librarians and information specialists. Seen from this perspective one expects a firm methodological basis for the field. This paper tries to explore the state-of-the-art conceming the methodology of classification. 2. Classification: Science or non-science? As it is part of the curriculum at universities and subject in scientific journals and conferences like ISKO, orte expects classification/knowledge organization to be a scientific or scholarly activity and a scientific field. However, very often when information specialists classify or index documents and when they revise classification system, the methods seem to be rather ad hoc. Research libraries or scientific databases may employ people with adequate subject knowledge. When information scientists construct or evaluate systems, they very often elicit the knowledge from "experts" (Hjorland, 2002b, p. 260). Mostly no specific arguments are provided for the specific decisions in these processes.

0.0115372855 = product of:
  0.034611855 = sum of:
    0.034611855 = product of:
      0.06922371 = sum of:
        0.06922371 = weight(_text_:22 in 4878) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06922371 = score(doc=4878,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17891833 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4878, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4878)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 6.2002 19:41:31

0.011450745 = product of:
  0.034352235 = sum of:
    0.034352235 = product of:
      0.06870447 = sum of:
        0.06870447 = weight(_text_:classification in 4607) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06870447 = score(doc=4607,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.42223644 = fieldWeight in 4607, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4607)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.011450745 = product of:
  0.034352235 = sum of:
    0.034352235 = product of:
      0.06870447 = sum of:
        0.06870447 = weight(_text_:classification in 385) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06870447 = score(doc=385,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.42223644 = fieldWeight in 385, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=385)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.011407284 = product of:
  0.03422185 = sum of:
    0.03422185 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1196) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03422185 = score(doc=1196,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.17204987 = fieldWeight in 1196, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1196)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This article describes the journey from the conception of and vision for a modern search-engine-based search environment to its technological realisation. In doing so, it takes up the thread of an earlier article on this subject, this time from a technical viewpoint. As well as presenting the conceptual considerations of the initial stages, this article will principally elucidate the technological aspects of this journey. The starting point for the deliberations about development of an academic search engine was the experience we gained through the generally successful project "Digital Library NRW", in which from 1998 to 2000-with Bielefeld University Library in overall charge-we designed a system model for an Internet-based library portal with an improved academic search environment at its core. At the heart of this system was a metasearch with an availability function, to which we added a user interface integrating all relevant source material for study and research. The deficiencies of this approach were felt soon after the system was launched in June 2001. There were problems with the stability and performance of the database retrieval system, with the integration of full-text documents and Internet pages, and with acceptance by users, because users are increasingly performing the searches themselves using search engines rather than going to the library for help in doing searches. Since a long list of problems are also encountered using commercial search engines for academic use (in particular the retrieval of academic information and long-term availability), the idea was born for a search engine configured specifically for academic use. We also hoped that with one single access point founded on improved search engine technology, we could access the heterogeneous academic resources of subject-based bibliographic databases, catalogues, electronic newspapers, document servers and academic web pages.

0.011407284 = product of:
  0.03422185 = sum of:
    0.03422185 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 3371) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03422185 = score(doc=3371,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.17204987 = fieldWeight in 3371, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3371)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Content

Inhalt: Introduction to Digital Libraries and Semantic Web: Introduction / Bill McDaniel and Sebastian Ryszard Kruk - Digital Libraries and Knowledge Organization / Dagobert Soergel - Semantic Web and Ontologies / Marcin Synak, Maciej Dabrowski and Sebastian Ryszard Kruk - Social Semantic Information Spaces / John G. Breslin A Vision of Semantic Digital Libraries: Goals of Semantic Digital Libraries / Sebastian Ryszard Kruk and Bill McDaniel - Architecture of Semantic Digital Libraries / Sebastian Ryszard Kruk, Adam Westerki and Ewelina Kruk - Long-time Preservation / Markus Reis Ontologies for Semantic Digital Libraries: Bibliographic Ontology / Maciej Dabrowski, Macin Synak and Sebastian Ryszard Kruk - Community-aware Ontologies / Slawomir Grzonkowski, Sebastian Ryszard Kruk, Adam Gzella, Jakub Demczuk and Bill McDaniel Prototypes of Semantic Digital Libraries: JeromeDL: The Social Semantic Digital Library / Sebastian Ryszard Kruk, Mariusz Cygan, Adam Gzella, Tomasz Woroniecki and Maciej Dabrowski - The BRICKS Digital Library Infrastructure / Bernhard Haslhofer and Predrag Knezevié - Semantics in Greenstone / Annika Hinze, George Buchanan, David Bainbridge and Ian Witten Building the Future - Semantic Digital Libraries in Use: Hyperbooks / Gilles Falquet, Luka Nerima and Jean-Claude Ziswiler - Semantic Digital Libraries for Archiving / Bill McDaniel - Evaluation of Semantic and Social Technologies for Digital Libraries / Sebastian Ryszard Kruk, Ewelina Kruk and Katarzyna Stankiewicz - Conclusions: The Future of Semantic Digital Libraries / Sebastian Ryszard Kruk and Bill McDaniel

0.010561377 = product of:
  0.03168413 = sum of:
    0.03168413 = product of:
      0.06336826 = sum of:
        0.06336826 = weight(_text_:classification in 3821) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06336826 = score(doc=3821,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.38944176 = fieldWeight in 3821, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3821)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This paper presents the approach and first results of the classification mapping process in the EU project Renardus. The outcome in Renardus is a cross-browsing feature based an the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) and improved subject searching across distributed and heterogeneous European subject gateways. The paper presents the project's initial experiences and decisions, e.g. an investigation of the use of classification systems by Renardus partners' gateways, general mapping approaches and issues, the definition of mapping relationships and some information an technical solutions and the mapping tool. There is also a demonstration of the use of the mapping information in Renardus and the presentation of several features that have been implemented to aid end-user navigation in a large and deep browsing structure like the DDC. Classification mapping for crossbrowsing is a labour intensive and complex effort which at the moment raises many open questions and leaves many more future potential work tasks than completed useful solutions.

Content

"1. The EU projeet Renardus Renardus is a project funded by the European Commission as part of the Information Society Technologies (IST) programme, part of the European Union's 5th Framework Programme. Partners in Renardus include national libraries, research centres and subject gateway services from Denmark, Finland, Germany, The Netherlands, Sweden and the UK, co-ordinated by the National Library of the Netherlands. The project aims to develop a Web-based service to enable searching and browsing across a range of distributed European-based information services designed for the academic and research communities - and in particular those services known as subject gateways. These gateways are services that provide access to Internet resources. They tend to be selective with regard to the resources they give access to, and are usually based an the manual creation of descriptive metadata. Services typically provide users with both search and browse facilities, and offen offer hierarchical browse structures based an subject classification schemes (Koch & Day, 1997). Predecessor projects like the EU project DESIRE have already developed solutions for the description of individual resources and for automatic classification at the level of an individual subject gateway using established classification systems. Renardus intends to develop a service that can cross-search and cross-browse a number of distributed subject gateways through the use of a common metadata profile and by the mapping all locally-used classification schemes to a common scheme. A thorough review of existing data models (Becker, et al., 2000) was used as the basis for the agreement of a minimum set of Dublin Core-based metadata elements that could be utilised as a common data model. A comprehensive mapping effort from the individual gateways' metadata element sets and content encoding schemes to the common profile has taken place. This provides the infrastructure for interoperability between all participating databases and thus is the necessary prerequisite for cross-searching."

Source

Subject retrieval in a networked environment: Proceedings of the IFLA Satellite Meeting held in Dublin, OH, 14-16 August 2001 and sponsored by the IFLA Classification and Indexing Section, the IFLA Information Technology Section and OCLC. Ed.: I.C. McIlwaine