Search (17 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × type_ss:"n"
  1. Z39.19-2005: Guidelines for the construction, format, and management of monolingual controlled vocabularies (2005) 0.05
    0.048266005 = product of:
      0.072399005 = sum of:
        0.045167856 = weight(_text_:resources in 708) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045167856 = score(doc=708,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133685 = queryNorm
            0.2419855 = fieldWeight in 708, 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=708)
        0.027231153 = product of:
          0.054462306 = sum of:
            0.054462306 = weight(_text_:management in 708) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.054462306 = score(doc=708,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.17235184 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051133685 = queryNorm
                0.31599492 = fieldWeight in 708, 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=708)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    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.
    Content
    Vgl.: http://www.niso.org/standards/resources/Z39-19-2005.pdf.
  2. Z39.19-1993: Guidelines for the construction, format, and management of monolingual thesauri (1993) 0.04
    0.04267989 = product of:
      0.12803967 = sum of:
        0.12803967 = sum of:
          0.072616406 = weight(_text_:management in 4092) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.072616406 = score(doc=4092,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.17235184 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                0.051133685 = queryNorm
              0.42132655 = fieldWeight in 4092, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4092)
          0.055423267 = weight(_text_:22 in 4092) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.055423267 = score(doc=4092,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.17906146 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.051133685 = 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)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    This 1993 edition is the authoritative guide constructing single-language thesauri, one of the most powerful tools for information retrieval. Written by experts, Z39.19 shows how to formulate descriptors, establish relationships among terms, and present the information in print and on a screen. Also included are thesaurus maintenance procedures and recommended features for thesaurus management systems
    Footnote
    Rez. in: Knowledge organization 22(1995) no.3/4, S.180-181 (M. Hudon)
  3. ISO 25964 Thesauri and interoperability with other vocabularies (2008) 0.03
    0.02789284 = product of:
      0.041839257 = sum of:
        0.022583928 = weight(_text_:resources in 1169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022583928 = score(doc=1169,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133685 = queryNorm
            0.12099275 = fieldWeight in 1169, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1169)
        0.01925533 = product of:
          0.03851066 = sum of:
            0.03851066 = weight(_text_:management in 1169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03851066 = score(doc=1169,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.17235184 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051133685 = queryNorm
                0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 1169, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1169)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    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.
    T.2: The ability to identify and locate relevant information among vast collections and other resources is a major and pressing challenge today. Several different types of vocabulary are in use for this purpose. Some of the most widely used vocabularies were designed a hundred years ago and have been evolving steadily. A different generation of vocabularies is now emerging, designed to exploit the electronic media more effectively. A good understanding of the previous generation is still essential for effective access to collections indexed with them. An important object of ISO 25964 as a whole is to support data exchange and other forms of interoperability in circumstances in which more than one structured vocabulary is applied within one retrieval system or network. Sometimes one vocabulary has to be mapped to another, and it is important to understand both the potential and the limitations of such mappings. In other systems, a thesaurus is mapped to a classification scheme, or an ontology to a thesaurus. Comprehensive interoperability needs to cover the whole range of vocabulary types, whether young or old. Concepts in different vocabularies are related only in that they have the same or similar meaning. However, the meaning can be found in a number of different aspects within each particular type of structured vocabulary: - within terms or captions selected in different languages; - in the notation assigned indicating a place within a larger hierarchy; - in the definition, scope notes, history notes and other notes that explain the significance of that concept; and - in explicit relationships to other concepts or entities within the same vocabulary. In order to create mappings from one structured vocabulary to another it is first necessary to understand, within the context of each different type of structured vocabulary, the significance and relative importance of each of the different elements in defining the meaning of that particular concept. ISO 25964-1 describes the key characteristics of thesauri along with additional advice on best practice. ISO 25964-2 focuses on other types of vocabulary and does not attempt to cover all aspects of good practice. It concentrates on those aspects which need to be understood if one of the vocabularies is to work effectively alongside one or more of the others. Recognizing that a new standard cannot be applied to some existing vocabularies, this part of ISO 25964 provides informative description alongside the recommendations, the aim of which is to enable users and system developers to interpret and implement the existing vocabularies effectively. The remainder of ISO 25964-2 deals with the principles and practicalities of establishing mappings between vocabularies.
  4. Pepper, S.; Moore, G.; TopicMaps.Org Authoring Group: XML Topic Maps (XTM) 1.0 : TopicMaps.Org Specification (2001) 0.03
    0.026077677 = product of:
      0.078233026 = sum of:
        0.078233026 = weight(_text_:resources in 1623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.078233026 = score(doc=1623,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133685 = queryNorm
            0.4191312 = fieldWeight in 1623, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1623)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    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.
  5. SKOS Simple Knowledge Organization System Primer (2009) 0.03
    0.026077677 = product of:
      0.078233026 = sum of:
        0.078233026 = weight(_text_:resources in 4795) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.078233026 = score(doc=4795,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133685 = queryNorm
            0.4191312 = fieldWeight in 4795, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4795)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    SKOS (Simple Knowledge Organisation System) provides a model for expressing the basic structure and content of concept schemes such as thesauri, classification schemes, subject heading lists, taxonomies, folksonomies, and other types of controlled vocabulary. As an application of the Resource Description Framework (RDF) SKOS allows concepts to be documented, linked and merged with other data, while still being composed, integrated and published on the World Wide Web. This document is an implementors guide for those who would like to represent their concept scheme using SKOS. In basic SKOS, conceptual resources (concepts) can be identified using URIs, labelled with strings in one or more natural languages, documented with various types of notes, semantically related to each other in informal hierarchies and association networks, and aggregated into distinct concept schemes. In advanced SKOS, conceptual resources can be mapped to conceptual resources in other schemes and grouped into labelled or ordered collections. Concept labels can also be related to each other. Finally, the SKOS vocabulary itself can be extended to suit the needs of particular communities of practice.
  6. ¬The Dublin Core Metadata Element Set (2007) 0.03
    0.025093256 = product of:
      0.075279765 = sum of:
        0.075279765 = weight(_text_:resources in 3395) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.075279765 = score(doc=3395,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133685 = queryNorm
            0.40330917 = fieldWeight in 3395, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3395)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    http://www.niso.org/standards/resources/Z39-85-2007.pdf
  7. Miller, E.; Schloss. B.; Lassila, O.; Swick, R.R.: Resource Description Framework (RDF) : model and syntax (1997) 0.02
    0.021512985 = product of:
      0.064538956 = sum of:
        0.064538956 = weight(_text_:resources in 5903) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.064538956 = score(doc=5903,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133685 = queryNorm
            0.3457656 = fieldWeight in 5903, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=5903)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    RDF - the Resource Description Framework - is a foundation for processing metadata; it provides interoperability between applications that exchange machine-understandable information on the Web. RDF emphasizes facilities to enable automated processing of Web resources. RDF metadata can be used in a variety of application areas; for example: in resource discovery to provide better search engine capabilities; in cataloging for describing the content and content relationships available at a particular Web site, page, or digital library; by intelligent software agents to facilitate knowledge sharing and exchange; in content rating; in describing collections of pages that represent a single logical "document"; for describing intellectual property rights of Web pages, and in many others. RDF with digital signatures will be key to building the "Web of Trust" for electronic commerce, collaboration, and other applications. Metadata is "data about data" or specifically in the context of RDF "data describing web resources." The distinction between "data" and "metadata" is not an absolute one; it is a distinction created primarily by a particular application. Many times the same resource will be interpreted in both ways simultaneously. RDF encourages this view by using XML as the encoding syntax for the metadata. The resources being described by RDF are, in general, anything that can be named via a URI. The broad goal of RDF is to define a mechanism for describing resources that makes no assumptions about a particular application domain, nor defines the semantics of any application domain. The definition of the mechanism should be domain neutral, yet the mechanism should be suitable for describing information about any domain. This document introduces a model for representing RDF metadata and one syntax for expressing and transporting this metadata in a manner that maximizes the interoperability of independently developed web servers and clients. The syntax described in this document is best considered as a "serialization syntax" for the underlying RDF representation model. The serialization syntax is XML, XML being the W3C's work-in-progress to define a richer Web syntax for a variety of applications. RDF and XML are complementary; there will be alternate ways to represent the same RDF data model, some more suitable for direct human authoring. Future work may lead to including such alternatives in this document.
    Content
    RDF Data Model At the core of RDF is a model for representing named properties and their values. These properties serve both to represent attributes of resources (and in this sense correspond to usual attribute-value-pairs) and to represent relationships between resources. The RDF data model is a syntax-independent way of representing RDF statements. RDF statements that are syntactically very different could mean the same thing. This concept of equivalence in meaning is very important when performing queries, aggregation and a number of other tasks at which RDF is aimed. The equivalence is defined in a clean machine understandable way. Two pieces of RDF are equivalent if and only if their corresponding data model representations are the same. Table of contents 1. Introduction 2. RDF Data Model 3. RDF Grammar 4. Signed RDF 5. Examples 6. Appendix A: Brief Explanation of XML Namespaces
  8. Proposed American National Standard guidelines for the construction, format, and management of monolingual thesauri (1991) 0.02
    0.01711585 = product of:
      0.05134755 = sum of:
        0.05134755 = product of:
          0.1026951 = sum of:
            0.1026951 = weight(_text_:management in 4644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.1026951 = score(doc=4644,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17235184 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051133685 = queryNorm
                0.5958457 = fieldWeight in 4644, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4644)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
  9. ISO 15836:2003 The Dublin Core metadata element set. (2003) 0.02
    0.015055953 = product of:
      0.045167856 = sum of:
        0.045167856 = weight(_text_:resources in 2079) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045167856 = score(doc=2079,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133685 = queryNorm
            0.2419855 = fieldWeight in 2079, 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=2079)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Footnote
    ISO 15836 is available for purchase in electronic or paper formats, in English and French, from ISO <http://www.iso.ch/>. A free downloadable pdf file of the ANSI/NISO version is available from the National Information Standards Organization (NISO) website: <http:www.niso.org/standards/resources/Z39-85.pdf>
  10. Frodl, C. (Bearb.); Fischer, T. (Bearb.); Baker, T. (Bearb.); Rühle, S. (Bearb.): Deutsche Übersetzung des Dublin-Core-Metadaten-Elemente-Sets (2007) 0.02
    0.015055953 = product of:
      0.045167856 = sum of:
        0.045167856 = weight(_text_:resources in 516) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045167856 = score(doc=516,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133685 = queryNorm
            0.2419855 = fieldWeight in 516, 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=516)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Content
    Das vorliegende Dokument ist eine Übersetzung des "Dublin Core Metadata Element Set, Version 1.1". Grundlage der Übersetzung ist: NISO Standard Z39.85-2007 (May 2007): http://www.niso.org/standards/resources/Z39-85-2007.pdf.
  11. ISO 15489: Records management : Pt. 1: ISO 15489-1: General; Pt.2: ISO/TR 15489-2: Guidelines (2001) 0.01
    0.014976369 = product of:
      0.044929106 = sum of:
        0.044929106 = product of:
          0.08985821 = sum of:
            0.08985821 = weight(_text_:management in 480) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08985821 = score(doc=480,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17235184 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051133685 = queryNorm
                0.521365 = fieldWeight in 480, 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=480)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
  12. Agnese Galeffi, A.; Bertolini, M.V.; Bothmann, R.L.; Rodríguez, E.E.; McGarry, D.: Statement of International Cataloguing Principles (ICP) 2016 (2016) 0.01
    0.014194889 = product of:
      0.042584665 = sum of:
        0.042584665 = weight(_text_:resources in 3284) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042584665 = score(doc=3284,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133685 = queryNorm
            0.22814612 = fieldWeight in 3284, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3284)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    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.
  13. OWL Web Ontology Language Guide (2004) 0.01
    0.012546628 = product of:
      0.037639882 = sum of:
        0.037639882 = weight(_text_:resources in 4687) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037639882 = score(doc=4687,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18665522 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051133685 = queryNorm
            0.20165458 = fieldWeight in 4687, 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=4687)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    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.
  14. OWL Web Ontology Language Test Cases (2004) 0.01
    0.009237211 = product of:
      0.027711634 = sum of:
        0.027711634 = product of:
          0.055423267 = sum of:
            0.055423267 = weight(_text_:22 in 4685) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.055423267 = score(doc=4685,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17906146 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051133685 = 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)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    14. 8.2011 13:33:22
  15. OWL Web Ontology Language Use Cases and Requirements (2004) 0.01
    0.008557925 = product of:
      0.025673775 = sum of:
        0.025673775 = product of:
          0.05134755 = sum of:
            0.05134755 = weight(_text_:management in 4686) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05134755 = score(doc=4686,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17235184 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051133685 = queryNorm
                0.29792285 = fieldWeight in 4686, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4686)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    This document specifies usage scenarios, goals and requirements for a web ontology language. An ontology formally defines a common set of terms that are used to describe and represent a domain. Ontologies can be used by automated tools to power advanced services such as more accurate web search, intelligent software agents and knowledge management.
  16. ISO/DIS 5127: Information and documentation - foundation and vocabulary (2013) 0.01
    0.005348703 = product of:
      0.016046109 = sum of:
        0.016046109 = product of:
          0.032092217 = sum of:
            0.032092217 = weight(_text_:management in 6070) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.032092217 = score(doc=6070,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17235184 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051133685 = queryNorm
                0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 6070, 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=6070)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    This standard provides the basic terms and their definitions in the field of information and documentation for the purpose of promoting and facilitating knowledge sharing and information exchange. This International Standard presents terms and definitions of selected concepts relevant to the field of information and documentation. If a definition is from other standards, the priority of selection is TC46 technical standards, then technical standards in relevant field, and then terminology related standards. The scope of this International Standard corresponds to that of ISO/TC46, Standardization of practices relating to libraries, documentation and information centres, publishing, archives, records management, museum documentation, indexing and abstracting services, and information science. ISO 5127 was prepared by Technical Committee ISO/TC 46, Information and Documentation, WG4, Terminology of information and documentation. This second edition cancels and replaces the first edition (ISO 5127:2001), which has been technically revised to overcome problems in the practical application of ISO 5127:2001 and to take account of the new developments in the field of information and documentation.
  17. Bibliotheks- und Dokumentationswesen : Gestaltung und Erschließung von Dokumenten, Bibliotheksmanagement, Codierungs- und Nummerungssysteme, Bestandserhaltung in Archiven und Bibliotheken (2002) 0.00
    0.00399983 = product of:
      0.01199949 = sum of:
        0.01199949 = product of:
          0.02399898 = sum of:
            0.02399898 = weight(_text_:22 in 1704) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02399898 = score(doc=1704,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.17906146 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051133685 = 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)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    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.