Search (101 results, page 1 of 6)

0.06973944 = product of:
  0.13947888 = sum of:
    0.11496095 = weight(_text_:policy in 4869) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11496095 = score(doc=4869,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24257277 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04524064 = queryNorm
        0.47392356 = fieldWeight in 4869, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4869)
    0.02451793 = product of:
      0.04903586 = sum of:
        0.04903586 = weight(_text_:22 in 4869) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04903586 = score(doc=4869,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15842502 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04524064 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

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

0.06102201 = product of:
  0.12204402 = sum of:
    0.10059083 = weight(_text_:policy in 4866) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10059083 = score(doc=4866,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24257277 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04524064 = queryNorm
        0.4146831 = fieldWeight in 4866, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4866)
    0.021453189 = product of:
      0.042906377 = sum of:
        0.042906377 = weight(_text_:22 in 4866) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042906377 = score(doc=4866,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15842502 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04524064 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4866, 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=4866)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Information subject gateways provide targeted discovery services for their users, giving access to Web resources selected according to quality and subject coverage criteria. Information gateways recognise that they must collaborate on a wide range of issues relating to content to ensure continued success. This report is informed by discussion of content activities at the 1999 Imesh Workshop. The author considers the implications for subject based gateways of co-operation regarding coverage policy, creation of metadata, and provision of searching and browsing across services. Other possibilities for co-operation include working more closely with information providers, and diclosure of information in joint metadata registries

Date

22. 6.2002 19:38:54

0.06102201 = product of:
  0.12204402 = sum of:
    0.10059083 = weight(_text_:policy in 5165) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10059083 = score(doc=5165,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24257277 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04524064 = queryNorm
        0.4146831 = fieldWeight in 5165, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5165)
    0.021453189 = product of:
      0.042906377 = sum of:
        0.042906377 = weight(_text_:22 in 5165) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042906377 = score(doc=5165,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15842502 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04524064 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5165, 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=5165)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Date

9. 9.2000 17:22:23

Source

Internet research. Electronic networking applications and policy. 8(1998) no.5, S.377-386

0.035564233 = product of:
  0.14225693 = sum of:
    0.14225693 = weight(_text_:policy in 2983) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14225693 = score(doc=2983,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.24257277 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04524064 = queryNorm
        0.5864505 = fieldWeight in 2983, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2983)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The Alliance Digital Repository (ADR) is a consortial digital repository service developed by Colorado Alliance of Research Libraries (Alliance). This paper details how a standard descriptive metadata policy for repository records developed, and how that policy is currently being implemented. All digital objects in the ADR are required to have MODS and OAI-Dublin Core metadata that conform to certain minimum requirements. To help members meet the requirements, Alliance staff and the ADR Metadata Working Group, using tools available in the Fedora/Fez repository environment, have developed a customized set of core ADR material type templates in XSD form.

0.03486972 = product of:
  0.06973944 = sum of:
    0.057480477 = weight(_text_:policy in 367) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.057480477 = score(doc=367,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24257277 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04524064 = queryNorm
        0.23696178 = fieldWeight in 367, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=367)
    0.012258965 = product of:
      0.02451793 = sum of:
        0.02451793 = weight(_text_:22 in 367) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02451793 = score(doc=367,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15842502 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04524064 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 367, 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=367)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

The proliferation of discipline-specific metadata schemes contributes to artificial barriers that can impede interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research. The authors considered this problem by examining the domains, objectives, and architectures of nine metadata schemes used to document scientific data in the physical, life, and social sciences. They used a mixed-methods content analysis and Greenberg's () metadata objectives, principles, domains, and architectural layout (MODAL) framework, and derived 22 metadata-related goals from textual content describing each metadata scheme. Relationships are identified between the domains (e.g., scientific discipline and type of data) and the categories of scheme objectives. For each strong correlation (>0.6), a Fisher's exact test for nonparametric data was used to determine significance (p < .05). Significant relationships were found between the domains and objectives of the schemes. Schemes describing observational data are more likely to have "scheme harmonization" (compatibility and interoperability with related schemes) as an objective; schemes with the objective "abstraction" (a conceptual model exists separate from the technical implementation) also have the objective "sufficiency" (the scheme defines a minimal amount of information to meet the needs of the community); and schemes with the objective "data publication" do not have the objective "element refinement." The analysis indicates that many metadata-driven goals expressed by communities are independent of scientific discipline or the type of data, although they are constrained by historical community practices and workflows as well as the technological environment at the time of scheme creation. The analysis reveals 11 fundamental metadata goals for metadata documenting scientific data in support of sharing research data across disciplines and domains. The authors report these results and highlight the need for more metadata-related research, particularly in the context of recent funding agency policy changes.

0.031828046 = product of:
  0.12731218 = sum of:
    0.12731218 = sum of:
      0.0905353 = weight(_text_:bibliography in 5272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0905353 = score(doc=5272,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.248568 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.494352 = idf(docFreq=493, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04524064 = queryNorm
          0.3642275 = fieldWeight in 5272, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.494352 = idf(docFreq=493, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5272)
      0.036776893 = weight(_text_:22 in 5272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.036776893 = score(doc=5272,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15842502 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04524064 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5272, 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=5272)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This article presents examples of metadata collaborations between the Swiss National Library (NL) and research institutions in the field of Swiss historiography. The NL publishes the Bibliography on Swiss History (BSH). In order to meet the demands of its research community, the NL has improved the accessibility and interoperability of the BSH database. Moreover, the BSH takes part in metadata projects such as Metagrid, a web service linking different historical databases. Other metadata collaborations with partners in the historical field such as the Law Sources Foundation (LSF) will position the BSH as an indispensable literature hub for publications on Swiss history.

Date

30. 5.2019 19:22:49

0.028740238 = product of:
  0.11496095 = sum of:
    0.11496095 = weight(_text_:policy in 1431) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11496095 = score(doc=1431,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24257277 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04524064 = queryNorm
        0.47392356 = fieldWeight in 1431, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1431)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Examines some important policy level issues which impact on the implementation of metadata systems at the State Library of New South Wales. The issues present challenges and opportunities for the establishment of a new 'digital' library identity and for the forging of new 'digital' relationships with client groups and with other cultural, educational, government and commercial institutions

0.028740238 = product of:
  0.11496095 = sum of:
    0.11496095 = weight(_text_:policy in 1561) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11496095 = score(doc=1561,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24257277 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04524064 = queryNorm
        0.47392356 = fieldWeight in 1561, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1561)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.028740238 = product of:
  0.11496095 = sum of:
    0.11496095 = weight(_text_:policy in 5221) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11496095 = score(doc=5221,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24257277 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04524064 = queryNorm
        0.47392356 = fieldWeight in 5221, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5221)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Internet research. Electronic networking applications and policy. 8(1998) no.4, S.347-358

0.028740238 = product of:
  0.11496095 = sum of:
    0.11496095 = weight(_text_:policy in 363) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11496095 = score(doc=363,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24257277 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04524064 = queryNorm
        0.47392356 = fieldWeight in 363, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=363)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Im Folgenden soll der Frage nachgegangen werden, inwiefern Bibliotheken den Qualitätsanspruch an inhaltserschließende Informationen von Ressourcen durch die Formulierung und Veröffentlichung einer bibliotheksspezifischen, übergeordneten Metadaten-Richtlinie bzw. -Policy - auch im Sinne einer Transparenzoffensive - und deren Anwendung beeinflussen können.

0.026135292 = product of:
  0.10454117 = sum of:
    0.10454117 = product of:
      0.20908234 = sum of:
        0.20908234 = weight(_text_:bibliography in 726) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.20908234 = score(doc=726,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.248568 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.494352 = idf(docFreq=493, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04524064 = queryNorm
            0.8411474 = fieldWeight in 726, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              5.494352 = idf(docFreq=493, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=726)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The present bibliography comprises research produced as doctoral dissertations and doctoral theses dealing with library cataloging, classification, and metadata. An attempt has been made to cover all the aspects of these topics so as to match the coverage of this bibliography with the scope of the journal, Cataloging & Classification Quarterly.

0.025403023 = product of:
  0.10161209 = sum of:
    0.10161209 = weight(_text_:policy in 1042) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10161209 = score(doc=1042,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.24257277 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04524064 = queryNorm
        0.41889322 = fieldWeight in 1042, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1042)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Natural language processing techniques can be used to analyze the linguistic content of a document to extract missing pieces of metadata. However, accurate metadata extraction may not depend solely on the linguistics, but also on structural problems such as extremely large documents, unordered multi-file documents, and inconsistency in manually labeled metadata. In this work, we start from two standard machine learning solutions to extract pieces of metadata from Environmental Impact Statements, environmental policy documents that are regularly produced under the US National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. We present a series of experiments where we evaluate how these standard approaches are affected by different issues derived from real-world data. We find that metadata extraction can be strongly influenced by nonlinguistic factors such as document length and volume ordering and that the standard machine learning solutions often do not scale well to long documents. We demonstrate how such solutions can be better adapted to these scenarios, and conclude with suggestions for other NLP practitioners cataloging large document collections.

0.022633824 = product of:
  0.0905353 = sum of:
    0.0905353 = product of:
      0.1810706 = sum of:
        0.1810706 = weight(_text_:bibliography in 5750) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1810706 = score(doc=5750,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.248568 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.494352 = idf(docFreq=493, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04524064 = queryNorm
            0.728455 = fieldWeight in 5750, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.494352 = idf(docFreq=493, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5750)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.022633824 = product of:
  0.0905353 = sum of:
    0.0905353 = product of:
      0.1810706 = sum of:
        0.1810706 = weight(_text_:bibliography in 674) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1810706 = score(doc=674,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.248568 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.494352 = idf(docFreq=493, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04524064 = queryNorm
            0.728455 = fieldWeight in 674, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.494352 = idf(docFreq=493, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=674)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.021555178 = product of:
  0.08622071 = sum of:
    0.08622071 = weight(_text_:policy in 4454) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08622071 = score(doc=4454,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24257277 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04524064 = queryNorm
        0.35544267 = fieldWeight in 4454, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4454)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Dublin Core is developed in an open consensus building environment and has also succeeded in many countries and in many domains. The idea of Dublin Core was to establish a de facto standard for metadata for discovery. There is a natural development from de facto standards to formal standards. A very important detail of formal standardisation is the stability and the credibility of an official standard. That was the background for the metadata policy of The Danish National Library Authority, agreed upon in Dec 1997. We decided to work for a formal standardisation of Dublin Core. there was - and is - a need for standardised method of describing Internet resources. And at that time Dublin core seemed to be the best bid for a metadata schema. It was not very widely used in practice, but Dublin Core was what people were talking about

0.021555178 = product of:
  0.08622071 = sum of:
    0.08622071 = weight(_text_:policy in 2988) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08622071 = score(doc=2988,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24257277 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04524064 = queryNorm
        0.35544267 = fieldWeight in 2988, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2988)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.021555178 = product of:
  0.08622071 = sum of:
    0.08622071 = weight(_text_:policy in 4096) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08622071 = score(doc=4096,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24257277 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04524064 = queryNorm
        0.35544267 = fieldWeight in 4096, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.361833 = idf(docFreq=563, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4096)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This new and updated second edition of a classic text provides a thought-provoking introduction to metadata for all library and information students and professionals. Metadata for Information Management and Retrieval has been fully revised by David Haynes to bring it up to date with new technology and standards. The new edition, containing new chapters on Metadata Standards and Encoding Schemes, assesses the current theory and practice of metadata and examines key developments in terms of both policy and technology. Coverage includes: an introduction to the concept of metadata a description of the main components of metadata systems and standards an overview of the scope of metadata and its applications a description of typical information retrieval issues in corporate and research environments a demonstration of ways in which metadata is used to improve retrieval a look at ways in which metadata is used to manage information consideration of the role of metadata in information governance.

0.018671954 = product of:
  0.074687816 = sum of:
    0.074687816 = product of:
      0.14937563 = sum of:
        0.14937563 = weight(_text_:bibliography in 5169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14937563 = score(doc=5169,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.248568 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.494352 = idf(docFreq=493, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04524064 = queryNorm
            0.60094476 = fieldWeight in 5169, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.494352 = idf(docFreq=493, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5169)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This article is examining if the metadata quality of the Swedish National Bibliography could be measured through mapping the level of user awareness regarding the characteristics of the data. A qualitative meta-synthesis was carried out and results from two previous studies conducted at the National Library of Sweden were interpreted and conceptualized through an integrated analyze. The results of the meta-synthesis showed a need for an action plan for increasing user awareness to efficiently reach target groups of national bibliographic data at its fullest potential, i.e. user awareness on the usability and the quality of the metadata.

0.013734429 = product of:
  0.054937717 = sum of:
    0.054937717 = sum of:
      0.04267875 = weight(_text_:bibliography in 2874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04267875 = score(doc=2874,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.248568 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.494352 = idf(docFreq=493, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04524064 = queryNorm
          0.1716985 = fieldWeight in 2874, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            5.494352 = idf(docFreq=493, maxDocs=44218)
            0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2874)
      0.012258965 = weight(_text_:22 in 2874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.012258965 = score(doc=2874,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15842502 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04524064 = queryNorm
          0.07738023 = fieldWeight in 2874, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2874)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

"Libraries: Tools for Education and Development" war das Motto der 70. IFLA-Generalkonferenz, dem Weltkongress Bibliothek und Information, der vom 22.-27. August 2004 in Buenos Aires, Argentinien, und damit erstmals in Lateinamerika stattfand. Rund 3.000 Teilnehmerinnen und Teilnehmer, davon ein Drittel aus spanischsprachigen Ländern, allein 600 aus Argentinien, besuchten die von der IFLA und dem nationalen Organisationskomitee gut organisierte Tagung mit mehr als 200 Sitzungen und Veranstaltungen. Aus Deutschland waren laut Teilnehmerverzeichnis leider nur 45 Kolleginnen und Kollegen angereist, womit ihre Zahl wieder auf das Niveau von Boston gesunken ist. Erfreulicherweise gab es nunmehr bereits im dritten Jahr eine deutschsprachige Ausgabe des IFLA-Express. Auch in diesem Jahr soll hier über die Veranstaltungen der Division IV Bibliographic Control berichtet werden. Die Arbeit der Division mit ihren Sektionen Bibliography, Cataloguing, Classification and Indexing sowie der neuen Sektion Knowledge Management bildet einen der Schwerpunkte der IFLA-Arbeit, die dabei erzielten konkreten Ergebnisse und Empfehlungen haben maßgeblichen Einfluss auf die tägliche Arbeit der Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare. Erstmals wird auch ausführlich über die Arbeit der Core Activities ICABS und UNIMARC und der Information Technology Section berichtet.

Content

Bibliography Section (Sektion Bibliographie) Die Sektion befasst sich mit Inhalt, Aufbau, Produktion, Verteilung und Erhaltung von bibliographischen Informationen, in erster Linie, aber nicht ausschließlich bezogen auf Nationalbibliographien. Sie fördert die "Universal Bibliographic Control (UBC)" durch die Verbreitung von Standards und praktischen Anwendungsbeispielen.

0.01333711 = product of:
  0.05334844 = sum of:
    0.05334844 = product of:
      0.10669688 = sum of:
        0.10669688 = weight(_text_:bibliography in 2093) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10669688 = score(doc=2093,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.248568 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.494352 = idf(docFreq=493, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04524064 = queryNorm
            0.42924625 = fieldWeight in 2093, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.494352 = idf(docFreq=493, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2093)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This paper deals with the problem of modeling Web information resources using expert knowledge and personalized user information for improved Web searching capabilities. We propose a "Web information space" model, which is composed of Web-based information resources (HTML/XML [Hypertext Markup Language/Extensible Markup Language] documents an the Web), expert advice repositories (domain-expert-specified metadata for information resources), and personalized information about users (captured as user profiles that indicate users' preferences about experts as well as users' knowledge about topics). Expert advice, the heart of the Web information space model, is specified using topics and relationships among topics (called metalinks), along the lines of the recently proposed topic maps. Topics and metalinks constitute metadata that describe the contents of the underlying HTML/XML Web resources. The metadata specification process is semiautomated, and it exploits XML DTDs (Document Type Definition) to allow domain-expert guided mapping of DTD elements to topics and metalinks. The expert advice is stored in an object-relational database management system (DBMS). To demonstrate the practicality and usability of the proposed Web information space model, we created a prototype expert advice repository of more than one million topics/metalinks for DBLP (Database and Logic Programming) Bibliography data set. We also present a query interface that provides sophisticated querying fa cilities for DBLP Bibliography resources using the expert advice repository.