Search (36 results, page 1 of 2)

0.074079625 = product of:
  0.111119434 = sum of:
    0.09033571 = weight(_text_:resources in 603) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09033571 = score(doc=603,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051133685 = queryNorm
        0.483971 = fieldWeight in 603, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=603)
    0.020783724 = product of:
      0.04156745 = sum of:
        0.04156745 = weight(_text_:22 in 603) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04156745 = score(doc=603,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17906146 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133685 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 603, 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=603)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The aims of CATRIONA were: (1) to investigate the requirements for developing procedures and applications for cataloguing and retrieval of networked resources, and (2) to explore the feasibility of a collaborative project to develop such applications and procedures and integrate them with existing library systems. The project established that a distributed catalogue of networked resources integrated with standard Z39.50 library system OPAC interfaces with information on hard-copy resources is already a practical proposition at a basic level. At least one Z39.50 OPAC client can search remote Z39.50 OPACs, retrieve USMARC records with URLs in 856$u, load a viewer like Netscape, and use it to retrieve and display the remotely held electronic resource on the local workstation. A follow-up project on related issues is being finalised.

Footnote

Simultaneously published as Electronic Resources: Selection and Bibliographic Control

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) nos.3/4, S.127-141

0.060738765 = product of:
  0.09110814 = sum of:
    0.063876994 = weight(_text_:resources in 1680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.063876994 = score(doc=1680,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051133685 = queryNorm
        0.34221917 = fieldWeight in 1680, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1680)
    0.027231153 = product of:
      0.054462306 = sum of:
        0.054462306 = weight(_text_:management in 1680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054462306 = score(doc=1680,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17235184 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133685 = queryNorm
            0.31599492 = fieldWeight in 1680, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1680)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

During the 1990s statewide cooperative use of networks in the USA has moved towards providing mainly access to bibliographic and full-text resources not held locally and usually provided by commercial vendors for use by libraries. Describes 3 academic library networks: the University System of Maryland's Library Information Management System serving the information needs of users throughout the state; Georgia's GALILEO (Georgia Library Learning On-Line) which provides a set of electronic resources and services for the 34 colleges and universities of the University System of Georgia; and TexShare in which all 52 libraries from the public educational institutions in Texas participate. Although the development of funding sources, the technical implementations and support, and the management organization differ from state to state, all three reflect an incremental shift towards the electronic library

0.05129568 = product of:
  0.07694352 = sum of:
    0.052695833 = weight(_text_:resources in 4866) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.052695833 = score(doc=4866,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051133685 = queryNorm
        0.28231642 = fieldWeight in 4866, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4866)
    0.02424768 = product of:
      0.04849536 = sum of:
        0.04849536 = weight(_text_:22 in 4866) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04849536 = score(doc=4866,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17906146 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133685 = 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)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

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

0.04332816 = product of:
  0.064992234 = sum of:
    0.05215535 = weight(_text_:resources in 1217) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05215535 = score(doc=1217,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051133685 = queryNorm
        0.2794208 = fieldWeight in 1217, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1217)
    0.0128368875 = product of:
      0.025673775 = sum of:
        0.025673775 = weight(_text_:management in 1217) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025673775 = score(doc=1217,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17235184 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133685 = queryNorm
            0.14896142 = fieldWeight in 1217, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1217)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The National Science Foundation's (NSF) National Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology Education Digital Library (NSDL) program seeks to create, develop, and sustain a national digital library supporting science, mathematics, engineering, and technology (SMET) education at all levels -- preK-12, undergraduate, graduate, and life-long learning. The resulting virtual institution is expected to catalyze and support continual improvements in the quality of science, mathematics, engineering, and technology (SMET) education in both formal and informal settings. The vision for this program has been explored through a series of workshops over the past several years and documented in accompanying reports and monographs. (See [1-7, 10, 12, and 13].) These efforts have led to a characterization of the digital library as a learning environments and resources network for science, mathematics, engineering, and technology education, that is: * designed to meet the needs of learners, in both individual and collaborative settings; * constructed to enable dynamic use of a broad array of materials for learning primarily in digital format; and * managed actively to promote reliable anytime, anywhere access to quality collections and services, available both within and without the network. Underlying the NSDL program are several working assumptions. First, while there is currently no lack of "great piles of content" on the Web, there is an urgent need for "piles of great content". The difficulties in discovering and verifying the authority of appropriate Web-based material are certainly well known, yet there are many examples of learning resources of great promise available (particularly those exploiting the power of multiple media), with more added every day. The breadth and interconnectedness of the Web are simultaneously a great strength and shortcoming. Second, the "unit" or granularity of educational content can and will shrink, affording the opportunity for users to become creators and vice versa, as learning objects are reused, repackaged, and repurposed. To be sure, this scenario cannot take place without serious attention to intellectual property and digital rights management concerns. But new models and technologies are being explored (see a number of recent articles in the January issue of D-Lib Magazine). Third, there is a need for an "organizational infrastructure" that facilitates connections between distributed users and distributed content, as alluded to in the third bullet above. Finally, while much of the ongoing use of the library is envisioned to be "free" in the sense of the public good, there is an opportunity and a need to consider multiple alternative models of sustainability, particularly in the area of services offered by the digital library. More details about the NSDL program including information about proposal deadlines and current awards may be found at <http://www.ehr.nsf.gov/ehr/due/programs/nsdl>.

0.042381406 = product of:
  0.06357211 = sum of:
    0.0368794 = weight(_text_:resources in 3964) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0368794 = score(doc=3964,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051133685 = queryNorm
        0.19758034 = fieldWeight in 3964, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=3964)
    0.026692703 = sum of:
      0.0128368875 = weight(_text_:management in 3964) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0128368875 = score(doc=3964,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17235184 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051133685 = queryNorm
          0.07448071 = fieldWeight in 3964, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=3964)
      0.013855817 = weight(_text_:22 in 3964) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.013855817 = score(doc=3964,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17906146 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051133685 = queryNorm
          0.07738023 = fieldWeight in 3964, 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=3964)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Content

Enthält die Beiträge: Devadason, F.J., N. Intaraksa u. P. Patamawongjariya u.a.: Faceted indexing application for organizing and accessing internet resources; Nicholson, D., S. Wake: HILT: subject retrieval in a distributed environment; Olson, T.: Integrating LCSH and MeSH in information systems; Kuhr, P.S.: Putting the world back together: mapping multiple vocabularies into a single thesaurus; Freyre, E., M. Naudi: MACS : subject access across languages and networks; McIlwaine, I.C.: The UDC and the World Wide Web; Garrison, W.A.: The Colorado Digitization Project: subject access issues; Vizine-Goetz, D., R. Thompson: Towards DDC-classified displays of Netfirst search results: subject access issues; Godby, C.J., J. Stuler: The Library of Congress Classification as a knowledge base for automatic subject categorization: subject access issues; O'Neill, E.T., E. Childress u. R. Dean u.a.: FAST: faceted application of subject terminology; Bean, C.A., R. Green: Improving subject retrieval with frame representation; Zeng, M.L., Y. Chen: Features of an integrated thesaurus management and search system for the networked environment; Hudon, M.: Subject access to Web resources in education; Qin, J., J. Chen: A multi-layered, multi-dimensional representation of digital educational resources; Riesthuis, G.J.A.: Information languages and multilingual subject access; Geisselmann, F.: Access methods in a database of e-journals; Beghtol, C.: The Iter Bibliography: International standard subject access to medieval and renaissance materials (400-1700); Slavic, A.: General library classification in learning material metadata: the application in IMS/LOM and CDMES metadata schemas; Cordeiro, M.I.: From library authority control to network authoritative metadata sources; Koch, T., H. Neuroth u. M. Day: Renardus: Cross-browsing European subject gateways via a common classification system (DDC); Olson, H.A., D.B. Ward: Mundane standards, everyday technologies, equitable access; Burke, M.A.: Personal Construct Theory as a research tool in Library and Information Science: case study: development of a user-driven classification of photographs

Footnote

Rez. in: KO 31(2004) no.2, S.117-118 (D. Campbell): "This excellent volume offers 22 papers delivered at an IFLA Satellite meeting in Dublin Ohio in 2001. The conference gathered together information and computer scientists to discuss an important and difficult question: in what specific ways can the accumulated skills, theories and traditions of librarianship be mobilized to face the challenges of providing subject access to information in present and future networked information environments? The papers which grapple with this question are organized in a surprisingly deft and coherent way. Many conferences and proceedings have unhappy sessions that contain a hodge-podge of papers that didn't quite fit any other categories. As befits a good classificationist, editor I.C. McIlwaine has kept this problem to a minimum. The papers are organized into eight sessions, which split into two broad categories. The first five sessions deal with subject domains, and the last three deal with subject access tools. The five sessions and thirteen papers that discuss access in different domains appear in order of in creasing intension. The first papers deal with access in multilingual environments, followed by papers an access across multiple vocabularies and across sectors, ending up with studies of domain-specific retrieval (primarily education). Some of the papers offer predictably strong work by scholars engaged in ongoing, long-term research. Gerard Riesthuis offers a clear analysis of the complexities of negotiating non-identical thesauri, particularly in cases where hierarchical structure varies across different languages. Hope Olson and Dennis Ward use Olson's familiar and welcome method of using provocative and unconventional theory to generate meliorative approaches to blas in general subject access schemes. Many papers, an the other hand, deal with specific ongoing projects: Renardus, The High Level Thesaurus Project, The Colorado Digitization Project and The Iter Bibliography for medieval and Renaissance material. Most of these papers display a similar structure: an explanation of the theory and purpose of the project, an account of problems encountered in the implementation, and a discussion of the results, both promising and disappointing, thus far. Of these papers, the account of the Multilanguage Access to Subjects Project in Europe (MACS) deserves special mention. In describing how the project is founded an the principle of the equality of languages, with each subject heading language maintained in its own database, and with no single language used as a pivot for the others, Elisabeth Freyre and Max Naudi offer a particularly vivid example of the way the ethics of librarianship translate into pragmatic contexts and concrete procedures. The three sessions and nine papers devoted to subject access tools split into two kinds: papers that discuss the use of theory and research to generate new tools for a networked environment, and those that discuss the transformation of traditional subject access tools in this environment. In the new tool development area, Mary Burke provides a promising example of the bidirectional approach that is so often necessary: in her case study of user-driven classification of photographs, she user personal construct theory to clarify the practice of classification, while at the same time using practice to test the theory. Carol Bean and Rebecca Green offer an intriguing combination of librarianship and computer science, importing frame representation technique from artificial intelligence to standardize syntagmatic relationships to enhance recall and precision.
The papers discussing the transformation of traditional tools locate the point of transformation in different places. Some, like the papers an DDC, LCC and UDC, suggest that these schemes can be imported into the networked environment and used as a basis for improving access to networked resources, just as they improve access to physical resources. While many of these papers are intriguing, I suspect that convincing those outside the profession will be difficult. In particular, Edward O'Neill and his colleagues, while offering a fascinating suggestion for preserving the Library of Congress Subject Headings and their associated infrastructure by converting them into a faceted scheme, will have an uphill battle convincing the unconverted that LCSH has a place in the online networked environment. Two papers deserve mention for taking a different approach: both Francis Devadason and Maria Ines Cordeiro suggest that we import concepts and techniques rather than realized schemes. Devadason argues for the creation of a faceted pre-coordinate indexing scheme for Internet resources based an Deep Structure indexing, which originates in Bhattacharyya's Postulate-Based Permuted Subject Indexing and in Ranganathan's chain indexing techniques. Cordeiro takes up the vitally important role of authority control in Web environments, suggesting that the techniques of authority control be expanded to enhance user flexibility. By focusing her argument an the concepts rather than an the existing tools, and by making useful and important distinctions between library and non-library uses of authority control, Cordeiro suggests that librarianship's contribution to networked access has less to do with its tools and infrastructure, and more to do with concepts that need to be boldly reinvented. The excellence of this collection derives in part from the energy, insight and diversity of the papers. Credit also goes to the planning and forethought that went into the conference itself by OCLC, the IFLA Classification and Indexing Section, the IFLA Information Technology Section, and the Program Committee, headed by editor I.C. McIlwaine. This collection avoids many of the problems of conference proceedings, and instead offers the best of such proceedings: detail, diversity, and judicious mixtures of theory and practice. Some of the disadvantages that plague conference proceedings appear here. Busy scholars sometimes interpret the concept of "camera-ready copy" creatively, offering diagrams that could have used some streamlining, and label boxes that cut off the tops or bottoms of letters. The papers are necessarily short, and many of them raise issues that deserve more extensive treatment. The issue of subject access in networked environments is crying out for further synthesis at the conceptual and theoretical level. But no synthesis can afford to ignore the kind of energetic, imaginative and important work that the papers in these proceedings represent."

0.040221673 = product of:
  0.060332507 = sum of:
    0.037639882 = weight(_text_:resources in 1154) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.037639882 = score(doc=1154,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051133685 = queryNorm
        0.20165458 = fieldWeight in 1154, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1154)
    0.022692626 = product of:
      0.045385253 = sum of:
        0.045385253 = weight(_text_:management in 1154) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045385253 = score(doc=1154,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17235184 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133685 = queryNorm
            0.2633291 = fieldWeight in 1154, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1154)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Metasearch - also called parallel search, federated search, broadcast search, and cross-database search - has become commonplace in the information community's vocabulary. All speak to a common theme of searching and retrieving from multiple databases, sources, platforms, protocols, and vendors at the point of the user's request. Metasearch services rely on a variety of approaches including open standards (such as NISO's Z39.50 and SRU/SRW), proprietary programming interfaces, and "screen scraping." However, the absence of widely supported standards, best practices, and tools makes the metasearch environment less efficient for the metasearch provider, the content provider, and ultimately the end-user. To spur the development of widely supported standards and best practices, the National Information Standards Organization (NISO) sponsored a Metasearch Initiative in 2003 to enable: * metasearch service providers to offer more effective and responsive services, * content providers to deliver enhanced content and protect their intellectual property, and * libraries to deliver a simple search (a.k.a. "Google") that covers the breadth of their vetted commercial and free resources. The Access Management Task Group was one of three groups chartered by NISO as part of the Metasearch Initiative. The focus of the group was on gathering requirements for Metasearch authentication and access needs, inventorying existing processes, developing a series of formal use cases describing the access needs, recommending best practices given today's processes, and recommending and pursing changes to current solutions to better support metasearch applications. In September 2005, the group issued their final report and recommendation. This article summarizes the group's work and final recommendation.

0.035790663 = product of:
  0.053685993 = sum of:
    0.037639882 = weight(_text_:resources in 984) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.037639882 = score(doc=984,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051133685 = queryNorm
        0.20165458 = fieldWeight in 984, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=984)
    0.016046109 = product of:
      0.032092217 = sum of:
        0.032092217 = weight(_text_:management in 984) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032092217 = score(doc=984,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17235184 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133685 = queryNorm
            0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 984, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=984)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

How to merge and organise query results retrieved from different resources is one of the key issues in distributed information retrieval. Some previous research and experiments suggest that cluster-based document browsing is more effective than a single merged list. Cluster-based retrieval results presentation is based on the cluster hypothesis, which states that documents that cluster together have a similar relevance to a given query. However, while this hypothesis has been demonstrated to hold in classical information retrieval environments, it has never been fully tested in heterogeneous distributed information retrieval environments. Heterogeneous document representations, the presence of document duplicates, and disparate qualities of retrieval results, are major features of an heterogeneous distributed information retrieval environment that might disrupt the effectiveness of the cluster hypothesis. In this paper we report on an experimental investigation into the validity and effectiveness of the cluster hypothesis in highly heterogeneous distributed information retrieval environments. The results show that although clustering is affected by different retrieval results representations and quality, the cluster hypothesis still holds and that generating hierarchical clusters in highly heterogeneous distributed information retrieval environments is still a very effective way of presenting retrieval results to users.

Source

Information processing and management. 42(2006) no.5, S.1137-1150

0.035130557 = product of:
  0.10539167 = sum of:
    0.10539167 = weight(_text_:resources in 1624) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10539167 = score(doc=1624,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051133685 = queryNorm
        0.56463283 = fieldWeight in 1624, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1624)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Subject-based retrieval in distributed resources is a current problem in online searches for bibliographic references. Building portals to similar resources is only the ferst step, the subsequent navigation via different search interfaces presents certain difficulties. To make retrieval easier it is necessary to adapt these different resources. Potential approaches (standardisation as opposed to "cross-walks") and methods (automated as opposed to intellectual effort) will be discussed. This includes a Brief appraisal of the future of work with multilingual terminology: - The "classical" approach (Multilingual Thesauri), - The "Internet" approach (linking) Recent developments in mono- and multilingual environments will be presented (MACS, CARMEN, Economics Crosswalk).

0.03483299 = product of:
  0.052249484 = sum of:
    0.032597095 = weight(_text_:resources in 1792) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032597095 = score(doc=1792,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051133685 = queryNorm
        0.174638 = fieldWeight in 1792, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1792)
    0.01965239 = product of:
      0.03930478 = sum of:
        0.03930478 = weight(_text_:management in 1792) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03930478 = score(doc=1792,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.17235184 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133685 = queryNorm
            0.22804968 = fieldWeight in 1792, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1792)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Specifically designed for core units in library automation and information systems, this long awaited new text gives students a comprehensive overview of one of the most critical areas of library operations. Produced by two internationally known scholars, Thomas Kochtanek and Joseph Matthews, this book will enable students to take the lead in managing an immense diversity of information resources and at the same time handle the complexities that information technology brings to the library. Giving important insight into library information systems-from the historical background to the latest technological trends and developments-the book is organized into 14 chapters, each presenting helpful information on such topics as systems design, types of systems, coverage of standards and standards organizations, technology axioms, system selection and implementation, usability of systems, library information systems management, technology trends, digital libraries, and more. New to the acclaimed Library and Information Science Text Series, this book will prove an indispensable resource to students preparing for a career in today's ever-evolving library environment. Complete with charts and illustrations, chapter summaries, suggested print and electronic resources, a glossary of terms, and an index, this text will be of central importance to libraries and library schools everywhere.

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST 54(2003) no.12, S.1166-1167 (Brenda Chawner): "Kochtanek and Matthews have written a welcome addition to the small set of introductory texts an applications of information technology to library and information Services. The book has fourteen chapters grouped into four sections: "The Broader Context," "The Technologies," "Management Issues," and "Future Considerations." Two chapters provide the broad content, with the first giving a historical overview of the development and adoption of "library information systems." Kochtanek and Matthews define this as "a wide array of solutions that previously might have been considered separate industries with distinctly different marketplaces" (p. 3), referring specifically to integrated library systems (ILS, and offen called library management systems in this part of the world), and online databases, plus the more recent developments of Web-based resources, digital libraries, ebooks, and ejournals. They characterize technology adoption patterns in libraries as ranging from "bleeding edge" to "leading edge" to "in the wedge" to "trailing edge"-this is a catchy restatement of adopter categories from Rogers' diffusion of innovation theory, where they are more conventionally known as "early adopters," "early majority," "late majority," and "laggards." This chapter concludes with a look at more general technology trends that have affected library applications, including developments in hardware (moving from mainframes to minicomputers to personal Computers), changes in software development (from in-house to packages), and developments in communications technology (from dedicated host Computers to more open networks to the current distributed environment found with the Internet). This is followed by a chapter describing the ILS and online database industries in some detail. "The Technologies" begins with a chapter an the structure and functionality of integrated library systems, which also includes a brief discussion of precision versus recall, managing access to internal documents, indexing and searching, and catalogue maintenance. This is followed by a chapter an open systems, which concludes with a useful list of questions to consider to determine an organization's readiness to adopt open source solutions. As one world expect, this section also includes a detailed chapter an telecommunications and networking, which includes types of networks, transmission media, network topologies, switching techniques (ranging from dial up and leased lines to ISDN/DSL, frame relay, and ATM). It concludes with a chapter an the role and importance of standards, which covers the need for standards and standards organizations, and gives examples of different types of standards, such as MARC, Dublin Core, Z39.50, and markup standards such as SGML, HTML, and XML. Unicode is also covered but only briefly. This section world be strengthened by a chapter an hardware concepts-the authors assume that their reader is already familiar with these, which may not be true in all cases (for example, the phrase "client-Server" is first used an page 11, but only given a brief definition in the glossary). Burke's Library Technology Companion: A Basic Guide for Library Staff (New York: Neal-Schuman, 2001) might be useful to fill this gap at an introductory level, and Saffady's Introduction to Automation for Librarians, 4th ed. (Chicago: American Library Association, 1999) world be better for those interested in more detail. The final two sections, however, are the book's real strength, with a strong focus an management issues, and this content distinguishes it from other books an this topic such as Ferguson and Hebels Computers for Librarians: an Introduction to Systems and Applications (Waggawagga, NSW: Centre for Information Studies, Charles Sturt University, 1998). ...
Though the book definitely meets a need for an up-to-date introduction to library information systems and associated management issues, and the emphasis an management issues means that it will not date too quickly, there is room for improvement. Some topics are described too briefly to be useful, such as customization/personalization, which is covered in a single paragraph, and does not mention recent developments such as the MyLibrary concept. Other topics seem to have only a peripheral connection to the main chapter theme-for example, it is surprising to find a discussion of information literacy at the end of the chapter an system selection and implementation, and the material an personalization/customization is at the end of the discussion of intranets. Despite these comments, 1 would consider using this as a textbook in an introductory course an library automation or information technology, and practitioners who want to upgrade their knowledge of current practices and issues will also find it useful. People who are primarily interested in a specific topic, such as information systems planning or system selection and implementation are likely to find more specialized books such as Planning for Integrated Systems and Technologies: A How-to-Do-It Manual for Librarians by John M. Cohn, Anne L. Kelsey, and Keith Michael Fiels (New York: Neal-Schuman, 2001) more useful."

0.027026644 = product of:
  0.08107993 = sum of:
    0.08107993 = sum of:
      0.032092217 = weight(_text_:management in 5801) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.032092217 = score(doc=5801,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17235184 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051133685 = queryNorm
          0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 5801, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5801)
      0.048987713 = weight(_text_:22 in 5801) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.048987713 = score(doc=5801,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.17906146 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051133685 = queryNorm
          0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 5801, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5801)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 6.2002 19:42:22

Source

Information Research & Content Management: Orientierung, Ordnung und Organisation im Wissensmarkt; 23. DGI-Online-Tagung der DGI und 53. Jahrestagung der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Informationswissenschaft und Informationspraxis e.V. DGI, Frankfurt am Main, 8.-10.5.2001. Proceedings. Hrsg.: R. Schmidt

0.020074604 = product of:
  0.06022381 = sum of:
    0.06022381 = weight(_text_:resources in 2229) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06022381 = score(doc=2229,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051133685 = queryNorm
        0.32264733 = fieldWeight in 2229, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2229)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Describes how the Northeast Fisheries Science Center (NEFSC) in Massachusetts is streamlining its cataloguing process while making its resources easily accessible using the 2 different electronic library systems and OPACs of its parent bodies: the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the Marine Biological Laboratory / Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution

0.020074604 = product of:
  0.06022381 = sum of:
    0.06022381 = weight(_text_:resources in 6560) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06022381 = score(doc=6560,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051133685 = queryNorm
        0.32264733 = fieldWeight in 6560, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6560)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Nowadays, users of information services are faced with highly decentralised, heterogeneous document sources with different content analysis. Semantic heterogeneity occurs e.g. when resources using different systems for content description are searched using a simple query system. This report describes several approaches of handling semantic heterogeneity used in projects of the German Social Science Information Centre

0.017743612 = product of:
  0.053230833 = sum of:
    0.053230833 = weight(_text_:resources in 1193) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.053230833 = score(doc=1193,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051133685 = queryNorm
        0.28518265 = fieldWeight in 1193, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1193)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This article describes two approaches for searching heterogeneous resources, which are explained as they are used in two corresponding existing systems-RIRS (Resource Integration Retrieval System) and HRUSP (Heterogeneous Resource Union Search Platform). On analyzing the existing systems, a possible framework-the MUSP (Multimetadata-Based Union Search Platform) is presented. Libraries now face a dilemma. On one hand, libraries subscribe to many types of database retrieval systems that are produced by various providers. The libraries build their data and information systems independently. This results in highly heterogeneous and distributed systems at the technical level (e.g., different operating systems and user interfaces) and at the conceptual level (e.g., the same objects are named using different terms). On the other hand, end users want to access all these heterogeneous data via a union interface, without having to know the structure of each information system or the different retrieval methods used by the systems. Libraries must achieve a harmony between information providers and users. In order to bridge the gap between the service providers and the users, it would seem that all source databases would need to be rebuilt according to a uniform data structure and query language, but this seems impossible. Fortunately, however, libraries and information and technology providers are now making an effort to find a middle course that meets the requirements of both data providers and users. They are doing this through resource integration.

0.017743612 = product of:
  0.053230833 = sum of:
    0.053230833 = weight(_text_:resources in 3951) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.053230833 = score(doc=3951,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051133685 = queryNorm
        0.28518265 = fieldWeight in 3951, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3951)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Purpose - Biodiversity resources are inevitably digital and stored in a wide variety of formats by researchers or stakeholders. In Malaysia, although digitizing biodiversity data has long been stressed, the interoperability of the biodiversity data is still an issue that requires attention. This is because, when data are shared, the question of copyright occurs, creating a setback among researchers wanting to promote or share data through online presentations. To solve this, the aim is to present an approach to integrate data through wrapping of datasets stored in relational databases located on networked platforms. Design/methodology/approach - The approach uses tools such as XML, PHP, ASP and HTML to integrate distributed databases in heterogeneous formats. Five current database integration systems were reviewed and all of them have common attributes such as query-oriented, using a mediator-based approach and integrating a structured data model. These common attributes were also adopted in the proposed solution. Distributed Generic Information Retrieval (DiGIR) was used as a model in designing the proposed solution. Findings - A new database integration system was developed, which is user-friendly and simple with common attributes found in current integration systems.

Footnote

Beitrag in einem Special Issue: Content architecture: exploiting and managing diverse resources: proceedings of the first national conference of the United Kingdom chapter of the International Society for Knowedge Organization (ISKO)

0.016833069 = product of:
  0.050499205 = sum of:
    0.050499205 = weight(_text_:resources in 1221) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050499205 = score(doc=1221,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051133685 = queryNorm
        0.27054805 = fieldWeight in 1221, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1221)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

In fall 2004, the National Science Foundation's (NSF) National Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education Digital Library (NSDL) program made new grants in three tracks: Pathways, Services, and Targeted Research. Together with projects started in fiscal years (FY) 2000-03 these new grants continue the development of a national digital library of high quality educational resources to support learning at all levels in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). By enabling broad access to reliable and authoritative learning and teaching materials and associated services in a digital environment, the National Science Digital Library expects to promote continual improvements in the quality of formal STEM education, and also to serve as a resource for informal and lifelong learning. Proposals for the FY05 funding cycle are due April 11, 2005, and the full solicitation is available at <http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=nsf05545>. Two NSF directorates, the Directorate for Geosciences (GEO) and the Directorate for Mathematical and Physical Sciences (MPS) have both provided significant co-funding for over twenty projects in the first four years of the program, illustrating the NSDL program's facilitation of the integration of research and education, an important strategic objective of the NSF. In FY2004, the NSDL program introduced a new Pathways track, replacing the earlier Collections track. The Services track strongly encouraged two particular types of projects: (1) selection services and (2) usage development workshops. * Pathways projects provide stewardship for educational content and services needed by a broad community of learners; * Selection services projects identify and increase the high-quality STEM educational content known to NSDL; and * Usage development workshops engage new communities of learners in the use of NSDL and its resources.
These three elements reflect a refinement of NSDL's initial emphasis on collecting educational resources, materials, and other digital learning objects, towards enabling learners to "connect" or otherwise find pathways to resources appropriate to their needs. Projects are also developing both the capacities of individual users and the capacity of larger communities of learners to use and contribute to NSDL. For the FY2004 funding cycle, one hundred forty-four proposals sought approximately $126.5 million in total funding. Twenty-four new awards were made with a cumulative budget of approximately $10.2 million. These include four in the Pathways track, twelve in the Services track, and eight in the Targeted Research track. As in the earlier years of the program, sister directorates to the NSF Directorate for Education and Human Resources (EHR) are providing significant co-funding of projects. Participating directorates for FY2004 are GEO and MPS. Within EHR, the Advanced Technological Education program and the Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research are also co-funding projects. Complete information on the technical and organizational progress of NSDL including links to current Standing Committees and community workspaces may be found at <http://nsdl.org/community/nsdlgroups.php>. All workspaces are open to the public, and interested organizations and individuals are encouraged to learn more about NSDL and join in its development. Following is a list of the new FY04 awards displaying the official NSF award number, the project title, the grantee institution, and the name of the Principal Investigator (PI). A condensed description of the project is also included. Full abstracts are available from the NSDL program site (under Related URLs see the link to NSDL program site (under Related URLs see the link to Abstracts of Recent Awards Made Through This Program.) The projects are displayed by track and are listed by award number. In addition, seven of these projects have explicit relevance to applications to pre-K to 12 education (indicated with a * below). Four others have clear potential for application to the pre-K to 12 arena (indicated with a ** below).

0.015055953 = product of:
  0.045167856 = sum of:
    0.045167856 = weight(_text_:resources in 1230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045167856 = score(doc=1230,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051133685 = queryNorm
        0.2419855 = fieldWeight in 1230, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1230)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

A Virtual union catalog is a possible alternative to the centralized database of distributed resources found in many library systems. Such a catalog would not be maintained in a single location but would be created in real time by searching each local campus or affiliate library's catalog through the Z39.50 protocol. This would eliminate the redundancy of record storage as well as the expense of loading and maintaining access to the central catalog. This article describes a test implementation of a virtual union catalog for the University of California system. It describes some of the differences between the virtual catalog and the existing, centralized union catalog (MELVYL). The research described in the paper suggests enhancements that must be made if the virtual union catalog is to become a reasonable service alternative to the MELVYL® catalog.

0.014976369 = product of:
  0.044929106 = sum of:
    0.044929106 = product of:
      0.08985821 = sum of:
        0.08985821 = weight(_text_:management in 4517) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08985821 = score(doc=4517,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17235184 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133685 = queryNorm
            0.521365 = fieldWeight in 4517, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4517)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Information processing and management. 35(1999) no.2, S.101-119

0.013855817 = product of:
  0.04156745 = sum of:
    0.04156745 = product of:
      0.0831349 = sum of:
        0.0831349 = weight(_text_:22 in 4865) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0831349 = score(doc=4865,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17906146 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133685 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 4865, 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=4865)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 6.2002 19:41:59

0.012546628 = product of:
  0.037639882 = sum of:
    0.037639882 = weight(_text_:resources in 4591) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.037639882 = score(doc=4591,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051133685 = queryNorm
        0.20165458 = fieldWeight in 4591, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4591)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This article addresses a crucial issue in the digital library environment: how to support effective interaction of users with heterogeneous and distributed information resources. In particular, this study compared usability, user preference, effectiveness, and searching behaviors in systems that implement interaction with multiple databases as if they were one (integrated interaction) in a experiment in the TREC environment. 28 volunteers were recruited from the graduate students of the School of Communication, Information & Library Studies at Rutgers University. Significantly more subjects preferred the common interface to the integrated interface, mainly because they could have more control over database selection. Subjects were also more satisfied with the results from the common interface, and performed better with the common interface than with the integrated interface. Overall, it appears that for this population, interacting with databases through a common interface is preferable on all grounds to interacting with databases through an integrated interface. These results suggest that: (1) the general assumption of the information retrieval (IR) literature that an integrated interaction is best needs to be revisited; (2) it is important to allow for more user control in the distributed environment; (3) for digital library purposes, it is important to characterize different databases to support user choice for integration; and (4) certain users prefer control over database selection while still opting for results to be merged

0.010037302 = product of:
  0.030111905 = sum of:
    0.030111905 = weight(_text_:resources in 2769) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030111905 = score(doc=2769,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051133685 = queryNorm
        0.16132367 = fieldWeight in 2769, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2769)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The paper will explore the issues surrounding the development of an evaluation framework for a supranational digital library system, as seen through the TEL (The European Library) project. It will describe work an the project to date, and seek to establish what are the key drivers, priorities and barriers encountered, in developing such a framework. TEL is being funded by the EU as an Accompanying Measure in the IST program. Its main focus of is an consensus building, and also includes preparatory technical work to develop testbeds, which will gauge to what extent interoperability is achievable. In order for TEL to take its place as a major Information Society initiative of the EU, it needs to be closely attuned to the needs, expectations and realities of its user communities, which comprise the citizens of the project's national partners. To this end the evaluation framework described in this paper, is being developed by establishing the users' viewpoints and priorities in relation to the key project themes. A summary of the issues to be used in the baseline, and to be expanded upon in the paper, follows: - Establishing the differing contexts of the national library partners, and the differing national priorities which will impact an TEL - Exploring the differing expectations relating to building and using the hybrid library - Exploring the differing expectations relating to TEL. TEL needs to add value - what does this mean in each partner state, and for the individuals within them? 1. Introduction to TEL TEL (The European Library) is a thirty month project, funded by the European Commission as part of its Fifth Framework Programme for research. It aims to set up a co-operative framework for access to the major national, mainly digital, collections in European national libraries. TEL is funded as an Accompanying Measure, designed to support the work of the IST (Information Society Technologies) Programme an the development of access to cultural and scientific knowledge. TEL will stop short of becoming a live service during the lifetime of the project, and is focused an ensuring co-operative and concerted approaches to technical and business issues associated with large-scale content development. It will lay the policy and technical groundwork towards a pan European digital library based an distributed digital collections, and providing seamless access to the digital resources of major European national libraries. It began in February, 2001, and has eight national library partners: Finland, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, Slovenia, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. It is also seeking to encourage the participation of all European national libraries in due course.