Search (10 results, page 1 of 1)

0.007818088 = product of:
  0.05472661 = sum of:
    0.05472661 = weight(_text_:great in 3284) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05472661 = score(doc=3284,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21992016 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.24884763 = fieldWeight in 3284, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3284)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

The original Statement of Principles - commonly known as the "Paris Principles" - was approved by the International Conference on Cataloguing Principles in 1961. Its goal of serving as a basis for international standardization in cataloguing has certainly been achieved: most of the cataloguing codes that were developed worldwide since that time have followed the Principles strictly or at least to a high degree. More than fifty years later, having a common set of international cataloguing principles is still necessary as cataloguers and users around the world use online catalogues as search and discovery systems. At the beginning of the 21st century, IFLA produced a new statement of principles (published in 2009) applicable to online library catalogues and beyond. The current version has been reviewed and updated in 2014 and 2015, and approved in 2016. The 2009 Statement of Principles replaced and explicitly broadened the scope of the Paris Principles from just textual resources to all types of resources, and from just the choice and form of entry to all aspects of bibliographic and authority data used in library catalogues. It included not only principles and objectives, but also guiding rules that should be included in cataloguing codes internationally, as well as guidance on search and retrieval capabilities. This 2016 edition takes into consideration new categories of users, the open access environment, the interoperability and the accessibility of data, features of discovery tools and the significant change of user behaviour in general. This statement builds on the great cataloguing traditions of the world, as well as on the conceptual models in the IFLA Functional Requirements family.

0.0067155454 = product of:
  0.047008816 = sum of:
    0.047008816 = weight(_text_:based in 8038) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.047008816 = score(doc=8038,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11767787 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.39947033 = fieldWeight in 8038, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=8038)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

This draft standard defines almost 400 separate three-character alphabetic codes to indicate language in the interchange of information. The list is based on the US MARC list, the revision updates the first one of 1987

0.005596288 = product of:
  0.039174013 = sum of:
    0.039174013 = weight(_text_:based in 3927) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.039174013 = score(doc=3927,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11767787 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.33289194 = fieldWeight in 3927, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3927)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

The newly revised standard of 3-letter codes for languages is based an the MARC language codes and ISO 6392/B

0.0033577727 = product of:
  0.023504408 = sum of:
    0.023504408 = weight(_text_:based in 708) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023504408 = score(doc=708,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11767787 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.19973516 = fieldWeight in 708, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=708)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

This Standard presents guidelines and conventions for the contents, display, construction, testing, maintenance, and management of monolingual controlled vocabularies. This Standard focuses on controlled vocabularies that are used for the representation of content objects in knowledge organization systems including lists, synonym rings, taxonomies, and thesauri. This Standard should be regarded as a set of recommendations based on preferred techniques and procedures. Optional procedures are, however, sometimes described, e.g., for the display of terms in a controlled vocabulary. The primary purpose of vocabulary control is to achieve consistency in the description of content objects and to facilitate retrieval. Vocabulary control is accomplished by three principal methods: defining the scope, or meaning, of terms; using the equivalence relationship to link synonymous and nearly synonymous terms; and distinguishing among homographs.

0.0033577727 = product of:
  0.023504408 = sum of:
    0.023504408 = weight(_text_:based in 1623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023504408 = score(doc=1623,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11767787 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.19973516 = fieldWeight in 1623, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1623)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

This specification provides a model and grammar for representing the structure of information resources used to define topics, and the associations (relationships) between topics. Names, resources, and relationships are said to be characteristics of abstract subjects, which are called topics. Topics have their characteristics within scopes: i.e. the limited contexts within which the names and resources are regarded as their name, resource, and relationship characteristics. One or more interrelated documents employing this grammar is called a topic map.TopicMaps.Org is an independent consortium of parties developing the applicability of the topic map paradigm [ISO13250] to the World Wide Web by leveraging the XML family of specifications. This specification describes version 1.0 of XML Topic Maps (XTM) 1.0 [XTM], an abstract model and XML grammar for interchanging Web-based topic maps, written by the members of the TopicMaps.Org Authoring Group. More information on XTM and TopicMaps.Org is available at http://www.topicmaps.org/about.html. All versions of the XTM Specification are permanently licensed to the public, as provided by the Charter of TopicMaps.Org.

0.0030238035 = product of:
  0.021166623 = sum of:
    0.021166623 = product of:
      0.042333245 = sum of:
        0.042333245 = weight(_text_:22 in 4092) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042333245 = score(doc=4092,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13677022 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03905679 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4092, 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=4092)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Footnote

Rez. in: Knowledge organization 22(1995) no.3/4, S.180-181 (M. Hudon)

0.0030238035 = product of:
  0.021166623 = sum of:
    0.021166623 = product of:
      0.042333245 = sum of:
        0.042333245 = weight(_text_:22 in 4685) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042333245 = score(doc=4685,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13677022 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03905679 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4685, 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=4685)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Date

14. 8.2011 13:33:22

0.002798144 = product of:
  0.019587006 = sum of:
    0.019587006 = weight(_text_:based in 4687) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019587006 = score(doc=4687,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11767787 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.16644597 = fieldWeight in 4687, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4687)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

The World Wide Web as it is currently constituted resembles a poorly mapped geography. Our insight into the documents and capabilities available are based on keyword searches, abetted by clever use of document connectivity and usage patterns. The sheer mass of this data is unmanageable without powerful tool support. In order to map this terrain more precisely, computational agents require machine-readable descriptions of the content and capabilities of Web accessible resources. These descriptions must be in addition to the human-readable versions of that information. The OWL Web Ontology Language is intended to provide a language that can be used to describe the classes and relations between them that are inherent in Web documents and applications. This document demonstrates the use of the OWL language to - formalize a domain by defining classes and properties of those classes, - define individuals and assert properties about them, and - reason about these classes and individuals to the degree permitted by the formal semantics of the OWL language. The sections are organized to present an incremental definition of a set of classes, properties and individuals, beginning with the fundamentals and proceeding to more complex language components.

0.0016788864 = product of:
  0.011752204 = sum of:
    0.011752204 = weight(_text_:based in 1169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011752204 = score(doc=1169,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11767787 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.09986758 = fieldWeight in 1169, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1169)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

T.1: Today's thesauri are mostly electronic tools, having moved on from the paper-based era when thesaurus standards were first developed. They are built and maintained with the support of software and need to integrate with other software, such as search engines and content management systems. Whereas in the past thesauri were designed for information professionals trained in indexing and searching, today there is a demand for vocabularies that untrained users will find to be intuitive. ISO 25964 makes the transition needed for the world of electronic information management. However, part 1 retains the assumption that human intellect is usually involved in the selection of indexing terms and in the selection of search terms. If both the indexer and the searcher are guided to choose the same term for the same concept, then relevant documents will be retrieved. This is the main principle underlying thesaurus design, even though a thesaurus built for human users may also be applied in situations where computers make the choices. Efficient exchange of data is a vital component of thesaurus management and exploitation. Hence the inclusion in this standard of recommendations for exchange formats and protocols. Adoption of these will facilitate interoperability between thesaurus management systems and the other computer applications, such as indexing and retrieval systems, that will utilize the data. Thesauri are typically used in post-coordinate retrieval systems, but may also be applied to hierarchical directories, pre-coordinate indexes and classification systems. Increasingly, thesaurus applications need to mesh with others, such as automatic categorization schemes, free-text search systems, etc. Part 2 of ISO 25964 describes additional types of structured vocabulary and gives recommendations to enable interoperation of the vocabularies at all stages of the information storage and retrieval process.

0.0013093452 = product of:
  0.0091654165 = sum of:
    0.0091654165 = product of:
      0.018330833 = sum of:
        0.018330833 = weight(_text_:22 in 1704) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018330833 = score(doc=1704,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.13677022 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03905679 = queryNorm
            0.1340265 = fieldWeight in 1704, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1704)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Am Anfang war das Wort. Sehr viel später erfand ein gewisser Herr Gutenberg ein Handgießinstrument zur Herstellung von Drucktypen. Und was sich daraus entwickelte, ist bekannt: Die moderne Informations- und Kommunikationsgesellschaft, deren Dynamik nicht zuletzt von der Effektivität der Daten-, Dokumenten- und Schriftgutverwaltung abhängt. Beim DIN-Taschenbuch 343 Bibliotheks- und Dokumentationswesen handelt es sich um ein Normenkompendium, das genau diese Verfahren aufgreift: Es stellt der interessierten Fachöffentlichkeit insgesamt 22 nationale und internationale Normen der Bereiche "Gestaltung und Erschließung von Dokumenten", "Bibliotheksmanagement", "Codierungs- und Nummerungssysteme" sowie "Bestandserhaltung in Archiven und Bibliotheken" vor. Die Auswahl der Normen verdeutlicht zweierlei: Zum einen den Einfluss der sich ständig weiterentwickelnden und dabei konvergierenden Technologien, der u.a. das Publizieren und die Datenrecherche beeinflusst. Zum zweiten die Notwendigkeit, neue Anforderungen zu berücksichtigen, die sich aus dem stetig zunehmenden internationalen Datenaustausch ergeben. Das DIN-Taschenbuch verschafft einen genauen Überblick über den Zusammenhang zwischen einschlägigen DIN- und ISO-Normen und klärt über Namencodes von Ländern und deren Untereinheiten auf (DIN ISO 3166-2:2001). Komplettiert wird das Werk durch den vollständigen Abdruck des DINFachberichts 13 "Bau- und Nutzungplanung von wissenschaftlichen Bibliotheken". Dort werden Bibliotheken als Servicezentren verstanden, die zunehmend digitalisierte Informationsquellen bereit stellen.

Content

Enthält 22 vollständig abgedruckte nationale und internationale Normen für die Bereiche Archiv-, Bibliotheks-, Dokumentations-, Museums- und Verlagswesen

Footnote

Rez. in: ABI-Technik 21(2002) H.3, S.294-295 (K. Weishaupt); "Im Deutschen Institut für Normung ist der Normenausschuss Bibliotheks- und Dokumentationswesen (NABD) verantwortlich für die nationale Normung für das Erstellen, Publizieren, Erschließen, Erhalten, Wiederauffinden, Vermitteln und die Nutzung von Dokumenten, Daten und Schriftgut für die Bereiche Archiv-, Bibliotheks, Dokumentations-, Museumsund Verlagswesen. Mit dem neuen DIN-Taschenbuch will er einen Überblick über die DIN-Normen geben, die in den letzten Jahren auf internationaler Ebene unter aktiver deutscher Mitarbeit veröffentlicht, dann als DIN-Normen übernommen worden sind und die den veränderten Anforderungen der Informations- und Kommunikationsgesellschaft Rechnung tragen - so die eigenen Angaben des Ausschusses im Vorwort (S. XI). Vor dem Hintergrund dieses recht offen formulierten Anspruches kommt es zu einer Zusammenstellung von 22 Normen, die auf den ersten Blick recht bunt gemischt wirkt: Abgedruckt sind Normen zur Erstellung und Weiterentwicklung von Thesauri, zu Titelangaben von Dokumenten, Kürzungs- und Transliterationsregeln, Sortierregeln, Abschnittsnummerierungen, Ländernamen, zur ISBN, ISSN sowie den Standardnummern ISMN und ISWC für Musikalien, zu Leistungsindikatoren für Bibliotheken und zu Lebensdauer-Klassen von Papier und Karton, Anforderungen an die Aufbewahrung von Archiv- und Bibliotheksgut und zur Alterungsbeständigkeit von Schriften. Der DIN-Fachbericht "Bau- und Nutzungsplanung von wissenschaftlichen Bibliotheken" rundet das Werk ab. Negativ ausgedrückt: Es wird niemanden geben, der für seinen beruflichen Alltag all diese Normen benötigt. Die positive Sicht: Das DIN-Taschenbuch deckt so viele Themen ab, dass der Kreis der Interessierten recht groß sein dürfte. Auf alle Fälle ist beeindruckend, zu wie vielen Themen aus den Bereich des Bibliotheks- und Dokumentationswesens es Normen gibt; vermutlich ist deren Existenz nicht einmal der Fachöffentlichkeit in vollem Umfang bekannt. Ein solches Beispiel ist DIN 1505, Teil 2: "Titelangaben von Dokumenten: Zitierregeln"; diese Norm wendet sich "an Autoren, Verleger und Redakteure und soll für Literaturzusammenstellungen, für Literaturverzeichnisse am Ende einer Schrift bzw. eines Beitrags, im Kontext oder in Fußnoten benutzt werden" (S. 38). Damit ist sie praktisch für alle relevant, die wissenschaftlich arbeiten und Texte schreiben - aber kaum jemand kennt diese Norm! Viele Zeitschriften und Fachgesellschaften haben ihre eigenen Regeln, nach denen zitiert werden soll. Im Institut Arbeit und Technik in Gelsenkirchen ist vor einigen Jahren mit Förderung der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft die Software LibLink entwickelt worden, mit der aus MAB-Daten, die aus einem Bibliothekskatalog exportiert worden waren, automatisiert Literaturverzeichnisse für wissenschaftliche Texte erstellt werden sollten.