-
Tennant, R.: ¬A bibliographic metadata infrastructure for the twenty-first century (2004)
0.06
0.0647644 = product of:
0.1295288 = sum of:
0.1295288 = sum of:
0.049684722 = weight(_text_:libraries in 2845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049684722 = score(doc=2845,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1711139 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.29036054 = fieldWeight in 2845, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2845)
0.07984409 = weight(_text_:22 in 2845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07984409 = score(doc=2845,freq=4.0), product of:
0.18240541 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 2845, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2845)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The current library bibliographic infrastructure was constructed in the early days of computers - before the Web, XML, and a variety of other technological advances that now offer new opportunities. General requirements of a modern metadata infrastructure for libraries are identified, including such qualities as versatility, extensibility, granularity, and openness. A new kind of metadata infrastructure is then proposed that exhibits at least some of those qualities. Some key challenges that must be overcome to implement a change of this magnitude are identified.
- Date
- 9.12.2005 19:22:38
- Source
- Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.175-181
-
Brugger, J.M.: Cataloging for digital libraries (1996)
0.06
0.063361555 = product of:
0.12672311 = sum of:
0.12672311 = sum of:
0.07026481 = weight(_text_:libraries in 3689) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07026481 = score(doc=3689,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1711139 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.4106318 = fieldWeight in 3689, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3689)
0.056458294 = weight(_text_:22 in 3689) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056458294 = score(doc=3689,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18240541 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3689, 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=3689)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Using grant funding, some prominent creators of digital libraries have promised users of networked resources certain kinds of access. Some of this access finds a ready-made vehicle in USMARC, some of it in the TEI header, some of it has yet to find the most appropriate vehicle. In its quest to provide access to what users need, the cataloging community can show leadership by exploring the strength inherent in a metadata-providing system like the TEI header.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) nos.3/4, S.59-73
-
Lubas, R.L.; Wolfe, R.H.W.; Fleischman, M.: Creating metadata practices for MIT's OpenCourseWare Project (2004)
0.06
0.062350206 = product of:
0.12470041 = sum of:
0.12470041 = sum of:
0.075299405 = weight(_text_:libraries in 2843) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.075299405 = score(doc=2843,freq=6.0), product of:
0.1711139 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.4400543 = fieldWeight in 2843, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2843)
0.049401004 = weight(_text_:22 in 2843) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049401004 = score(doc=2843,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18240541 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2843, 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=2843)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The MIT libraries were called upon to recommend a metadata scheme for the resources contained in MIT's OpenCourseWare (OCW) project. The resources in OCW needed descriptive, structural, and technical metadata. The SCORM standard, which uses IEEE Learning Object Metadata for its descriptive standard, was selected for its focus on educational objects. However, it was clear that the Libraries would need to recommend how the standard would be applied and adapted to accommodate needs that were not addressed in the standard's specifications. The newly formed MIT Libraries Metadata Unit adapted established practices from AACR2 and MARC traditions when facing situations in which there were no precedents to follow.
- Source
- Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.138-143
-
Kurth, M.; Ruddy, D.; Rupp, N.: Repurposing MARC metadata : using digital project experience to develop a metadata management design (2004)
0.05
0.05344303 = product of:
0.10688606 = sum of:
0.10688606 = sum of:
0.064542346 = weight(_text_:libraries in 4748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.064542346 = score(doc=4748,freq=6.0), product of:
0.1711139 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.3771894 = fieldWeight in 4748, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4748)
0.042343717 = weight(_text_:22 in 4748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042343717 = score(doc=4748,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18240541 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4748, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4748)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Metadata and information technology staff in libraries that are building digital collections typically extract and manipulate MARC metadata sets to provide access to digital content via non-MARC schemes. Metadata processing in these libraries involves defining the relationships between metadata schemes, moving metadata between schemes, and coordinating the intellectual activity and physical resources required to create and manipulate metadata. Actively managing the non-MARC metadata resources used to build digital collections is something most of these libraries have only begun to do. This article proposes strategies for managing MARC metadata repurposing efforts as the first step in a coordinated approach to library metadata management. Guided by lessons learned from Cornell University library mapping and transformation activities, the authors apply the literature of data resource management to library metadata management and propose a model for managing MARC metadata repurposing processes through the implementation of a metadata management design.
- Source
- Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.144-152
-
Rogers, D.: Cataloguing Internet resources : the evolution of the Dublin Core metadata set (1997)
0.05
0.053071506 = product of:
0.10614301 = sum of:
0.10614301 = sum of:
0.049684722 = weight(_text_:libraries in 903) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049684722 = score(doc=903,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1711139 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.29036054 = fieldWeight in 903, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=903)
0.056458294 = weight(_text_:22 in 903) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056458294 = score(doc=903,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18240541 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 903, 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=903)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Recently the view has developed that electronic resources require the same level of cataloguing as the physical resources found in libraries, with the effect that a number of guidelines for cataloguing Internet resources have appeared. Describes one such standard for resource description, the Dublin Core metadata set, the ongoing refinement of the metadata elements and the application of the Dublin Core metadata set
- Source
- Cataloguing Australia. 23(1997) nos.1/2, S.17-22
-
Peereboom, M.: DutchESS : Dutch Electronic Subject Service - a Dutch national collaborative effort (2000)
0.05
0.053071506 = product of:
0.10614301 = sum of:
0.10614301 = sum of:
0.049684722 = weight(_text_:libraries in 4869) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049684722 = score(doc=4869,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1711139 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.29036054 = fieldWeight in 4869, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4869)
0.056458294 = weight(_text_:22 in 4869) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056458294 = score(doc=4869,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18240541 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- 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
-
Gorman, M.: Metadata or cataloguing? : a false choice (1999)
0.05
0.053071506 = product of:
0.10614301 = sum of:
0.10614301 = sum of:
0.049684722 = weight(_text_:libraries in 6095) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049684722 = score(doc=6095,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1711139 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.29036054 = fieldWeight in 6095, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6095)
0.056458294 = weight(_text_:22 in 6095) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056458294 = score(doc=6095,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18240541 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 6095, 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=6095)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Libraries, their collections, and bibliographic control are essential components of the provision of access to recorded knowledge. Cataloging is a primary method of bibliographic control. Full or traditional cataloging is very expensive, but relying on keyword searching is inadequate. Alternatives for a solution to cataloging needs for electronic resources including the use of metadata and the Dublin Core are examined. Many questions exist regarding the long-term future of today's electronic documents. Recommendations are made for preserving recorded knowledge and information in the electronic resources for future generations
- Source
- Journal of Internet cataloging. 2(1999) no.1, S.5-22
-
Understanding metadata (2004)
0.05
0.053071506 = product of:
0.10614301 = sum of:
0.10614301 = sum of:
0.049684722 = weight(_text_:libraries in 2686) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049684722 = score(doc=2686,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1711139 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.29036054 = fieldWeight in 2686, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2686)
0.056458294 = weight(_text_:22 in 2686) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056458294 = score(doc=2686,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18240541 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2686, 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=2686)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Metadata (structured information about an object or collection of objects) is increasingly important to libraries, archives, and museums. And although librarians are familiar with a number of issues that apply to creating and using metadata (e.g., authority control, controlled vocabularies, etc.), the world of metadata is nonetheless different than library cataloging, with its own set of challenges. Therefore, whether you are new to these concepts or quite experienced with classic cataloging, this short (20 pages) introductory paper on metadata can be helpful
- Date
- 10. 9.2004 10:22:40
-
Hill, J.S.: Analog people for digital dreams : staffing and educational considerations for cataloging and metadata professionals (2005)
0.05
0.053071506 = product of:
0.10614301 = sum of:
0.10614301 = sum of:
0.049684722 = weight(_text_:libraries in 126) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049684722 = score(doc=126,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1711139 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.29036054 = fieldWeight in 126, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=126)
0.056458294 = weight(_text_:22 in 126) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056458294 = score(doc=126,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18240541 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 126, 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=126)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- As libraries attempt to incorporate increasing amounts of electronic resources into their catalogs, utilizing a growing variety of metadata standards, library and information science programs are grappling with how to educate catalogers to meet these challenges. In this paper, an employer considers the characteristics and skills that catalogers will need and how they might acquire them.
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
-
Yee, R.; Beaubien, R.: ¬A preliminary crosswalk from METS to IMS content packaging (2004)
0.05
0.04752116 = product of:
0.09504232 = sum of:
0.09504232 = sum of:
0.052698605 = weight(_text_:libraries in 4752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.052698605 = score(doc=4752,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1711139 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.30797386 = fieldWeight in 4752, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4752)
0.042343717 = weight(_text_:22 in 4752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042343717 = score(doc=4752,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18240541 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4752, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4752)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- As educational technology becomes pervasive, demand will grow for library content to be incorporated into courseware. Among the barriers impeding interoperability between libraries and educational tools is the difference in specifications commonly used for the exchange of digital objects and metadata. Among libraries, Metadata Encoding and Transmission Standard (METS) is a new but increasingly popular standard; the IMS content-package (IMS-CP) plays a parallel role in educational technology. This article describes how METS-encoded library content can be converted into digital objects for IMS-compliant systems through an XSLT-based crosswalk. The conceptual models behind METS and IMS-CP are compared, the design and limitations of an XSLT-based translation are described, and the crosswalks are related to other techniques to enhance interoperability.
- Source
- Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1, S.69-81
-
Vellucci, S.L.: Metadata and authority control (2000)
0.05
0.04643757 = product of:
0.09287514 = sum of:
0.09287514 = sum of:
0.043474134 = weight(_text_:libraries in 180) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043474134 = score(doc=180,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1711139 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.25406548 = fieldWeight in 180, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=180)
0.049401004 = weight(_text_:22 in 180) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049401004 = score(doc=180,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18240541 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 180, 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=180)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- A variety of information communities have developed metadata schemes to meet the needs of their own users. The ability of libraries to incorporate and use multiple metadata schemes in current library systems will depend on the compatibility of imported data with existing catalog data. Authority control will play an important role in metadata interoperability. In this article, I discuss factors for successful authority control in current library catalogs, which include operation in a well-defined and bounded universe, application of principles and standard practices to access point creation, reference to authoritative lists, and bibliographic record creation by highly trained individuals. Metadata characteristics and environmental models are examined and the likelihood of successful authority control is explored for a variety of metadata environments.
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
-
Jizba, L.; Hillmann, D.I.: Insights from Ithaca : an interview with Diane Hillmann on metadata, Dublin Core, the National Science Digital Library, and more (2004/05)
0.05
0.04643757 = product of:
0.09287514 = sum of:
0.09287514 = sum of:
0.043474134 = weight(_text_:libraries in 637) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043474134 = score(doc=637,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1711139 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.25406548 = fieldWeight in 637, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=637)
0.049401004 = weight(_text_:22 in 637) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049401004 = score(doc=637,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18240541 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 637, 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=637)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- In an interview, Diane I. Hillmann, an expert in metadata for digital libraries and currently co-principal investigator for the National Science Digital Library Registry based at Cornell University, discusses her education and career, and provides overviews and insights on metadata initiatives, including standards and models such as the widely adopted Dublin Core schema. She shares her professional interests from the early part of her career with communications, cataloging, and database production services; highlights key issues; and provides ideas and resources for managing changes in metadata standards and digital projects.
- Date
- 2.12.2007 19:35:22
-
Ilik, V.; Storlien, J.; Olivarez, J.: Metadata makeover (2014)
0.05
0.04643757 = product of:
0.09287514 = sum of:
0.09287514 = sum of:
0.043474134 = weight(_text_:libraries in 2606) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043474134 = score(doc=2606,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1711139 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.25406548 = fieldWeight in 2606, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2606)
0.049401004 = weight(_text_:22 in 2606) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049401004 = score(doc=2606,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18240541 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2606, 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=2606)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Catalogers have become fluent in information technology such as web design skills, HyperText Markup Language (HTML), Cascading Stylesheets (CSS), eXensible Markup Language (XML), and programming languages. The knowledge gained from learning information technology can be used to experiment with methods of transforming one metadata schema into another using various software solutions. This paper will discuss the use of eXtensible Stylesheet Language Transformations (XSLT) for repurposing, editing, and reformatting metadata. Catalogers have the requisite skills for working with any metadata schema, and if they are excluded from metadata work, libraries are wasting a valuable human resource.
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
-
Metadata and semantics research : 10th International Conference, MTSR 2016, Göttingen, Germany, November 22-25, 2016, Proceedings (2016)
0.05
0.04643757 = product of:
0.09287514 = sum of:
0.09287514 = sum of:
0.043474134 = weight(_text_:libraries in 3283) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043474134 = score(doc=3283,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1711139 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.25406548 = fieldWeight in 3283, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3283)
0.049401004 = weight(_text_:22 in 3283) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049401004 = score(doc=3283,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18240541 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3283, 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=3283)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This book constitutes the refereed proceedings of the 10th Metadata and Semantics Research Conference, MTSR 2016, held in Göttingen, Germany, in November 2016. The 26 full papers and 6 short papers presented were carefully reviewed and selected from 67 submissions. The papers are organized in several sessions and tracks: Digital Libraries, Information Retrieval, Linked and Social Data, Metadata and Semantics for Open Repositories, Research Information Systems and Data Infrastructures, Metadata and Semantics for Agriculture, Food and Environment, Metadata and Semantics for Cultural Collections and Applications, European and National Projects.
-
DeZelar-Tiedman, C.: Exploring user-contributed metadata's potential to enhance access to literary works (2011)
0.04
0.03980363 = product of:
0.07960726 = sum of:
0.07960726 = sum of:
0.037263542 = weight(_text_:libraries in 2595) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.037263542 = score(doc=2595,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1711139 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.2177704 = fieldWeight in 2595, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2595)
0.042343717 = weight(_text_:22 in 2595) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042343717 = score(doc=2595,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18240541 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2595, 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=2595)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Academic libraries have moved toward providing social networking features, such as tagging, in their library catalogs. To explore whether user tags can enhance access to individual literary works, the author obtained a sample of individual works of English and American literature from the twentieth and twenty-first centuries from a large academic library catalog and searched them in LibraryThing. The author compared match rates, the availability of subject headings and tags across various literary forms, and the terminology used in tags versus controlled-vocabulary headings on a subset of records. In addition, she evaluated the usefulness of available LibraryThing tags for the library catalog records that lacked subject headings. Options for utilizing the subject terms available in sources outside the local catalog also are discussed.
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
-
Wisser, K.M.; O'Brien Roper, J.: Maximizing metadata : exploring the EAD-MARC relationship (2003)
0.04
0.03960097 = product of:
0.07920194 = sum of:
0.07920194 = sum of:
0.043915503 = weight(_text_:libraries in 154) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043915503 = score(doc=154,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1711139 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.25664487 = fieldWeight in 154, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=154)
0.035286434 = weight(_text_:22 in 154) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035286434 = score(doc=154,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18240541 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 154, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=154)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Encoded Archival Description (EAD) has provided a new way to approach manuscript and archival collection representation. A review of previous representational practices and problems highlights the benefits of using EAD. This new approach should be considered a partner rather than an adversary in the access providing process. Technological capabilities now allow for multiple metadata schemas to be employed in the creation of the finding aid. Crosswalks allow for MARC records to be generated from the detailed encoding of an EAD finding aid. In the process of creating these crosswalks and detailed encoding, EAD has generated more changes in traditional processes and procedures than originally imagined. The North Carolina State University (NCSU) Libraries sought to test the process of crosswalking EAD to MARC, investigating how this process used technology as well as changed physical procedures. By creating a complex and indepth EAD template for finding aids, with accompanying related encoding analogs embedded within the element structure, MARC records were generated that required minor editing and revision for inclusion in the NCSU Libraries OPAC. The creation of this bridge between EAD and MARC has stimulated theoretical discussions about the role of collaboration, technology, and expertise in the ongoing struggle to maximize access to our collections. While this study is a only a first attempt at harnessing this potential, a presentation of the tensions, struggles, and successes provides illumination to some of the larger issues facing special collections today.
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
-
Toth, M.B.; Emery, D.: Applying DCMI elements to digital images and text in the Archimedes Palimpsest Program (2008)
0.03
0.033169694 = product of:
0.06633939 = sum of:
0.06633939 = sum of:
0.031052953 = weight(_text_:libraries in 2651) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.031052953 = score(doc=2651,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1711139 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.18147534 = fieldWeight in 2651, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2651)
0.035286434 = weight(_text_:22 in 2651) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035286434 = score(doc=2651,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18240541 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2651, 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=2651)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The digitized version of the only extant copy of Archimedes' key mathematical and scientific works contains over 6,500 images and 130 pages of transcriptions. Metadata is essential for managing, integrating and accessing these digital resources in the Web 2.0 environment. The Dublin Core Metadata Element Set meets many of our needs. It offers the needed flexibility and applicability to a variety of data sets containing different texts and images in a dynamic technical environment. The program team has continued to refine its data dictionary and elements based on the Dublin Core standard and feedback from the Dublin Core community since the 2006 Dublin Core Conference. This presentation cites the application and utility of the DCMI Standards during the final phase of this decade-long program. Since the 2006 conference, the amount of data has grown tenfold with new imaging techniques. Use of the DCMI Standards for integration across digital images and transcriptions will allow the hosting and integration of this data set and other cultural works across service providers, libraries and cultural institutions.
- Source
- Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
-
Jimenez, V.O.R.: Nuevas perspectivas para la catalogacion : metadatos ver MARC (1999)
0.03
0.029941533 = product of:
0.059883066 = sum of:
0.059883066 = product of:
0.11976613 = sum of:
0.11976613 = weight(_text_:22 in 5743) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11976613 = score(doc=5743,freq=4.0), product of:
0.18240541 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.6565931 = fieldWeight in 5743, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5743)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 30. 3.2002 19:45:22
- Source
- Revista Española de Documentaçion Cientifica. 22(1999) no.2, S.198-219
-
Andresen, L.: Metadata in Denmark (2000)
0.03
0.028229147 = product of:
0.056458294 = sum of:
0.056458294 = product of:
0.11291659 = sum of:
0.11291659 = weight(_text_:22 in 4899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11291659 = score(doc=4899,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18240541 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 4899, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4899)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 16. 7.2000 20:58:22
-
MARC and metadata : METS, MODS, and MARCXML: current and future implications (2004)
0.03
0.028229147 = product of:
0.056458294 = sum of:
0.056458294 = product of:
0.11291659 = sum of:
0.11291659 = weight(_text_:22 in 2840) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11291659 = score(doc=2840,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18240541 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052088603 = queryNorm
0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 2840, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2840)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1
