Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

0.021602837 = product of:
  0.05400709 = sum of:
    0.045255374 = weight(_text_:great in 2514) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045255374 = score(doc=2514,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2424797 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.18663573 = fieldWeight in 2514, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2514)
    0.008751715 = product of:
      0.01750343 = sum of:
        0.01750343 = weight(_text_:22 in 2514) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01750343 = score(doc=2514,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15080018 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043063257 = queryNorm
            0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 2514, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2514)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Content

Dervos, D.A., A. Coleman: A common sense approach to defining data, information, and metadata. - Keränen, S.: Equivalence and focus of translation in multicultural thesaurus construction. - Dabbadie, M., J.M. Blancherie: Alexandria, a multilingual dictionary for knowledge management purposes. - Rosemblat, G., L. Graham: Cross-language search in a monolingual health information system: flexible designs and lexical processes. - Garcia Marco, F.J.: Understanding the categories and dynamics of multimedia information: a model for analysing multimedia information. - Afolabi, B., O. Thiery: Using users' expectations to adapt business intelligence systems. - Zimmermann, K., J. Mimkes u. H.U. Kamke: An ontology framework for e-learning in the knowledge society. - Jacob, E.K., H. Albrechtsen u. N. George: Empirical analysis and evaluation of a metadata scheme for representing pedagogical resources in a digital library for educators. - Breitenstein, M.: Global unity: Otto Neurath and the International Encyclopedia of United Science. - Andersen, J.: Social change, modernity and bibliography: bibliography as a document and a genre in the global learning society. - Miksa, S.D., WE. Moen u. G. Snyder u.a.: Metadata assistance of the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Record's four user tasks: a report on the MARC content designation utilization (MCDU) project. - Salaba, A., M.L. Zeng u. M. Zumer: Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Records. - Frâncu, V.: Subjects in FRBR and poly-hierarchical thesauri as possible knowledge organization tools. - Peschl, M.F.: Knowledge-oriented educational processes from knowledge transfer to collective knowledge creation and innovation. - Miller, S.J., M.J. Fox u. H.L. Lee u.a.: Great expectations: professionals' perceptions and knowledge organization curricula. - Pajarillo, E.J.Y.: A qualitative research on the use of knowledge organization in nursing information behavior.

Date

27.12.2008 11:22:36

0.008448379 = product of:
  0.042241894 = sum of:
    0.042241894 = weight(_text_:education in 5134) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042241894 = score(doc=5134,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20288157 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.2082096 = fieldWeight in 5134, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5134)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Metadata research has emerged as a discipline cross-cutting many domains, focused on the provision of distributed descriptions (often called annotations) to Web resources or applications. Such associated descriptions are supposed to serve as a foundation for advanced services in many application areas, including search and location, personalization, federation of repositories and automated delivery of information. Indeed, the Semantic Web is in itself a concrete technological framework for ontology-based metadata. For example, Web-based social networking requires metadata describing people and their interrelations, and large databases with biological information use complex and detailed metadata schemas for more precise and informed search strategies. There is a wide diversity in the languages and idioms used for providing meta-descriptions, from simple structured text in metadata schemas to formal annotations using ontologies, and the technologies for storing, sharing and exploiting meta-descriptions are also diverse and evolve rapidly. In addition, there is a proliferation of schemas and standards related to metadata, resulting in a complex and moving technological landscape - hence, the need for specialized knowledge and skills in this area. The Handbook of Metadata, Semantics and Ontologies is intended as an authoritative reference for students, practitioners and researchers, serving as a roadmap for the variety of metadata schemas and ontologies available in a number of key domain areas, including culture, biology, education, healthcare, engineering and library science.

0.0046675815 = product of:
  0.023337906 = sum of:
    0.023337906 = product of:
      0.046675812 = sum of:
        0.046675812 = weight(_text_:22 in 4654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046675812 = score(doc=4654,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15080018 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043063257 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4654, 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=4654)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 1.2017 17:12:50

0.0042241896 = product of:
  0.021120947 = sum of:
    0.021120947 = weight(_text_:education in 440) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021120947 = score(doc=440,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20288157 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043063257 = queryNorm
        0.1041048 = fieldWeight in 440, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=440)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Footnote

Chun Wei Choo focused on environmental analyzability and organizational intrusiveness in an effort to theorize and to highlight intricacies in scanning as managers attempt to deal with uncertainty and complexity in their environment. Correia and Wilson used a case-study approach to examine managerial scanning in 19 companies; 47 semistructured interviews were performed in an effort to develop a grounded theory of scanning. Because of the grounded theory approach, the authors did not use statistical sampling but rather utilized principles of maximum variation sampling and theoretical sampling. Categories and relationships that emerged from the grounded theory approach were utilized to build a model of the environmental process. Judith Broady-Preston presents an interesting discussion on balanced scorecard as a way to keep track of successful strategies and their impact on various areas of organizational performance, including finances, innovation and learning, and customer perceptions. Yet, although there have been three efforts to clarify the purpose of a balanced scorecard, the concept remains unclear, along with a role that information professionals can play in its successful application in organizations. France Bouthillier and Kathleen Shearer set review case studies of five private and five public organizations to bring out elements, practices, and benefits associated with knowledge management (KM). As stated by the authors: "generally speaking, IM involves the integration of a variety of activities designed to manage information and information resources throughout their life cycle" (p. 150). The authors say that the focus of KM initiatives, as opposed to the focus in IM initiatives, tends to be on "knowledge-sharing methodologies such as communities of practice, virtual collaboration and expert databases" (p. 150). In the chapter "The Nonsense of Knowledge Management" revisited by Wilson, he states that communities of practice are at the heart of methodologies for KM. And natural arenas for KM and communities of practice are various disciplines in education and departments in the medical field because of the collaborative spirit in these two fields. But, he also repeats his criticisms that beyond these arenas, there is no such thing as KM in business where competition is the norm rather than collaboration. He emphasizes that a common problem in the KM community is the treatment of knowledge as a thing or a commodity, when in reality, knowledge is a complex and dynamic process. The chapter also provides additional evidence from analysis of various publications that show KM as a fragmented field and as a business fad, according to Wilson.

0.0029172383 = product of:
  0.014586192 = sum of:
    0.014586192 = product of:
      0.029172383 = sum of:
        0.029172383 = weight(_text_:22 in 1753) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029172383 = score(doc=1753,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15080018 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043063257 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1753, 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=1753)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 3.2008 12:26:32