Search (18 results, page 1 of 1)

0.052765545 = product of:
  0.2638277 = sum of:
    0.2638277 = weight(_text_:computers in 7061) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2638277 = score(doc=7061,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.22709264 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.257537 = idf(docFreq=625, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04319373 = queryNorm
        1.1617625 = fieldWeight in 7061, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          5.257537 = idf(docFreq=625, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=7061)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

COMPASS

Libraries / On-line computers

Footnote

Rez. in: Computers in libraries 12(1992) no.2, S.46 (W.E. Drew)

Series

Supplements to computers in libraries; 32

Subject

Libraries / On-line computers

0.052235223 = product of:
  0.2611761 = sum of:
    0.2611761 = weight(_text_:computers in 5701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2611761 = score(doc=5701,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22709264 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.257537 = idf(docFreq=625, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04319373 = queryNorm
        1.1500862 = fieldWeight in 5701, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.257537 = idf(docFreq=625, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5701)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

COMPASS

Computers / Networks

Subject

Computers / Networks

0.029848699 = product of:
  0.14924349 = sum of:
    0.14924349 = weight(_text_:computers in 818) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14924349 = score(doc=818,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22709264 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.257537 = idf(docFreq=625, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04319373 = queryNorm
        0.6571921 = fieldWeight in 818, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.257537 = idf(docFreq=625, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=818)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

COMPASS

Information retrieval / Use of / On-line computers

Subject

Information retrieval / Use of / On-line computers

0.026382772 = product of:
  0.13191386 = sum of:
    0.13191386 = weight(_text_:computers in 3104) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13191386 = score(doc=3104,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22709264 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.257537 = idf(docFreq=625, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04319373 = queryNorm
        0.58088124 = fieldWeight in 3104, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.257537 = idf(docFreq=625, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3104)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Describes SUNET, the Swedish University Network, a medium speed network connecting most most mainframe and smaller computers in Swedish universities. Discusses the application of SUNET to remote access to OPACs

0.021106217 = product of:
  0.10553108 = sum of:
    0.10553108 = weight(_text_:computers in 8358) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10553108 = score(doc=8358,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22709264 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.257537 = idf(docFreq=625, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04319373 = queryNorm
        0.464705 = fieldWeight in 8358, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.257537 = idf(docFreq=625, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8358)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Explains the basic principles of the ISO Search and Retrieve (SR) standard which facilitates the searching and retrieval of data from computers via electronic networks regardless of the hardware and software used. Provides an introduction to SR and addresses the parameters of SR servies. Abstract Syntax Notation 1 and the preliminary implementation of an SR Update Service in the KARIN cataloguing system

0.021106217 = product of:
  0.10553108 = sum of:
    0.10553108 = weight(_text_:computers in 5082) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10553108 = score(doc=5082,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22709264 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.257537 = idf(docFreq=625, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04319373 = queryNorm
        0.464705 = fieldWeight in 5082, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.257537 = idf(docFreq=625, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5082)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Open System Interconnection (OSI) Standard 7498 appeared in 1984. Open systems of PCs and workstations decentralize information processing and divide it between several computers, based on the client-server concept. Relevant terminology is explained, including application protocol, bases of the SR/Z39.50 model, data transmission, search request services, query types, attribute sets, transmission format, transfer syntax, solution models and cooperation between library systems

0.016338138 = product of:
  0.081690684 = sum of:
    0.081690684 = weight(_text_:analog in 2170) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.081690684 = score(doc=2170,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.32627475 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.5537524 = idf(docFreq=62, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04319373 = queryNorm
        0.2503739 = fieldWeight in 2170, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          7.5537524 = idf(docFreq=62, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2170)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Content

"Wenn Telefongesellschaften ihre Netze auf das Übertragungsprinzip des Internets umstellen - warum sollte man dann nicht gleich die Datenleitungen zum Telefonieren verwenden? Eine naheliegender Gedanke, der auf der Cebit viele Besucher begeistert. Voice over IP, die technische Bezeichnung des Verfahrens, hat sich unvorhergesehen zu einem Trend der Messe entwickelt. Erste Angebote, mit denen Privatleute unter Umständen ihre Telefonrechnung senken könne, liegen vor. Richtig los gehen wird es wohl erst im Sommer. Mit Voice over IP kann der herkömmliche Telefonkanal entfallen. Nötig ist nur die breitbandige DSL-Leitung. Über die geht die Sprache in From von Datenpaketen zum Internetprovider. Der prüft in einer Kartei, ob der Angerufene ebenfalls per Datenleitung erreichbar ist. Falls ja, stellt er das Gespräch durch - in der Regel kostenlos, weil nur das interne Netz benötigt wird. Ist der Partner nur analog oder per ISDN angebunden, leitet der Anbieter das Gespräch ins herkömmliche Netz weiter - und verlangt dafür zeitbezogene Preise. Die liegen zumindest für nationale Festnetzverbindungen meistens unter denen der Deutschen Telekom. Allerdings ist die Umleitung bei manchen Anbietern noch teurer als Telefonate mit Call-by-call-Sparvorwahlen. - Eigene Vorwahl geplant - Die Regulierungsbehörde für Telekommunikation und Post reagiert auf die Aufbruchstimmung. Die Behörde schlägt eine Nummerngasse für "innovative Services" vor. IP-Telefonierer können daher noch für dieses Jahr damit rechnen, eine ortsunabhängige Vorwahl zu bekommen. Bisher behilft sich der Anbieter Indigo Networks für sein Projekt Sipgate mit Rufnummern aus Düsseldorf, Essen, Hamburg, Nürnberg, London und Reading. Kunden haben, unabhängig vom Wohnort, die freie Wahl.

0.009363446 = product of:
  0.046817232 = sum of:
    0.046817232 = product of:
      0.093634464 = sum of:
        0.093634464 = weight(_text_:22 in 4147) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.093634464 = score(doc=4147,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15125708 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04319373 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 4147, 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=4147)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

Cogito. 9(1993) H.2, S.18-22

0.008193015 = product of:
  0.040965077 = sum of:
    0.040965077 = product of:
      0.08193015 = sum of:
        0.08193015 = weight(_text_:22 in 8109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08193015 = score(doc=8109,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15125708 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04319373 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 8109, 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=8109)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

Cogito. 10(1994) H.4, S.17-22

0.008193015 = product of:
  0.040965077 = sum of:
    0.040965077 = product of:
      0.08193015 = sum of:
        0.08193015 = weight(_text_:22 in 2656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08193015 = score(doc=2656,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15125708 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04319373 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 2656, 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=2656)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

30.11.1995 20:53:22

0.0070225853 = product of:
  0.035112925 = sum of:
    0.035112925 = product of:
      0.07022585 = sum of:
        0.07022585 = weight(_text_:22 in 354) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07022585 = score(doc=354,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15125708 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04319373 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 354, 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=354)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

Com!. 1997, H.8, S.22-24

0.0070225853 = product of:
  0.035112925 = sum of:
    0.035112925 = product of:
      0.07022585 = sum of:
        0.07022585 = weight(_text_:22 in 5935) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07022585 = score(doc=5935,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15125708 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04319373 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 5935, 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=5935)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Footnote

Rez. in: Internet Professionell 2000, H.2, S.22

0.0058521545 = product of:
  0.029260771 = sum of:
    0.029260771 = product of:
      0.058521543 = sum of:
        0.058521543 = weight(_text_:22 in 877) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.058521543 = score(doc=877,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15125708 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04319373 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 877, 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=877)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Pages

S.22-31

0.0058521545 = product of:
  0.029260771 = sum of:
    0.029260771 = product of:
      0.058521543 = sum of:
        0.058521543 = weight(_text_:22 in 2955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.058521543 = score(doc=2955,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15125708 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04319373 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2955, 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=2955)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

19. 2.1999 20:21:22

0.0051638293 = product of:
  0.025819147 = sum of:
    0.025819147 = product of:
      0.051638294 = sum of:
        0.051638294 = weight(_text_:history in 4898) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.051638294 = score(doc=4898,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20093648 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04319373 = queryNorm
            0.25698814 = fieldWeight in 4898, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4898)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

This article will examine the Z39.50 Information Retrieval protocol. It will look at some of the history of the protocol, its operation, and some of the major projects that have made use of it. There has been enough written (perhaps too much) about Z39.50 in the last several years so it is not intended to be a tutorial or detailed description of the protocol. The material that will be presented will try and put some context around the discussion. For those readers who are interested in delving into Z39.50 in a more technical manner, references to much of the material that has been written about it over the years will be provided at the end. Finally, the article will conclude with some thoughts on how technology and technological infrastructure have changed in the years since Z39.50 was initially developed and deployed, and where the protocol has so far lived up to its goals, and where it has perhaps failed to meet some of the high expectations that at least some people involved in the Z39.50 community held for it. The article will conclude with some of the author's speculations (and they are really no more than that) of what the future role of Z39.50 is likely to be.

0.0043816543 = product of:
  0.021908272 = sum of:
    0.021908272 = product of:
      0.043816544 = sum of:
        0.043816544 = weight(_text_:history in 1262) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043816544 = score(doc=1262,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.20093648 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04319373 = queryNorm
            0.21806167 = fieldWeight in 1262, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1262)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

The Z39.50 standard for information retrieval is important from a number of perspectives. While still not widely known within the computer networking community, it is a mature standard that represents the culmination of two decades of thinking and debate about how information retrieval functions can be modeled, standardized, and implemented in a distributed systems environment. And - importantly -- it has been tested through substantial deployment experience. Z39.50 is one of the few examples we have to date of a protocol that actually goes beyond codifying mechanism and moves into the area of standardizing shared semantic knowledge. The extent to which this should be a goal of the protocol has been an ongoing source of controversy and tension within the developer community, and differing views on this issue can be seen both in the standard itself and the way that it is used in practice. Given the growing emphasis on issues such as "semantic interoperability" as part of the research agenda for digital libraries (see Clifford A. Lynch and Hector Garcia-Molina. Interoperability, Scaling, and the Digital Libraries Research Agenda, Report on the May 18-19, 1995 IITA Libraries Workshop, <http://www- diglib.stanford.edu/diglib/pub/reports/iita-dlw/main.html>), the insights gained by the Z39.50 community into the complex interactions among various definitions of semantics and interoperability are particularly relevant. The development process for the Z39.50 standard is also of interest in its own right. Its history, dating back to the 1970s, spans a period that saw the eclipse of formal standards-making agencies by groups such as the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and informal standards development consortia. Moreover, in order to achieve meaningful implementation, Z39.50 had to move beyond its origins in the OSI debacle of the 1980s. Z39.50 has also been, to some extent, a victim of its own success -- or at least promise. Recent versions of the standard are highly extensible, and the consensus process of standards development has made it hospitable to an ever-growing set of new communities and requirements. As this process of extension has proceeded, it has become ever less clear what the appropriate scope and boundaries of the protocol should be, and what expectations one should have of practical interoperability among implementations of the standard. Z39.50 thus offers an excellent case study of the problems involved in managing the evolution of a standard over time. It may well offer useful lessons for the future of other standards such as HTTP and HTML, which seem to be facing some of the same issues.
This paper, which will appear in two parts, starting with this issue of D-Lib, looks at several strategic issues surrounding Z39.50. After a relatively brief overview of the function and history of the protocol, I will examine some of the competing visions of the protocol's role, with emphasis on issues of interoperability and the incorporation of semantics. The second installment of the paper will look at questions related to the management of the standard and the standards development process, with emphasis on the scope of the protocol and how that relates back again to interoperability questions. The paper concludes with a discussion of the adoption and deployment of the standard, its relationship to other standards, and some speculations on future directions for the protocol. This paper is not intended to be a tutorial on the details of how current or past versions of Z39.50 work. These technical details are covered not only in the standard itself (which can admittedly be rather difficult reading) but also in an array of tutorial and review papers (see <http://lcweb.loc.gov/z3950/agency> for bibliographies and pointers to on-line information on Z39.50). Instead, the paper's focus is on how and why Z39.50 developed the way it did, and the conceptual debates that have influenced its evolution and use. While a detailed technical knowledge of the operation of Z39.50 is certainly helpful, it should not be necessary in order to follow most of the material here. Some disclaimers are in order. I have been actively involved in the development of Z39.50 since the early 1980s and have been a participant -- and on occasion, even an instigator -- of some of the activities described here. This paper is an attempt to make a critical assessment of the current state of Z39.50 and a review of its development with the full benefit of hindsight. It recounts a number of debates that occurred within the developer community over the past years. In many of these, I advocated specific positions or approaches, sometimes successfully and sometimes unsuccessfully. What is presented here is one person's perspective - mine --, which is sometimes at odds with the current consensus with the developer community; I've tried to represent opposing views fairly, and to differentiate my opinions from fact or consensus. However, others will undoubtedly disagree with many of the comments here.

0.0040965076 = product of:
  0.020482538 = sum of:
    0.020482538 = product of:
      0.040965077 = sum of:
        0.040965077 = weight(_text_:22 in 3696) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040965077 = score(doc=3696,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15125708 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04319373 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3696, 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=3696)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

8. 1.2007 17:22:42

0.0035112926 = product of:
  0.017556462 = sum of:
    0.017556462 = product of:
      0.035112925 = sum of:
        0.035112925 = weight(_text_:22 in 3013) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035112925 = score(doc=3013,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15125708 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04319373 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3013, 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=3013)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 2.1999 13:06:18