Search (42 results, page 1 of 3)

0.03386244 = product of:
  0.10158732 = sum of:
    0.03787318 = weight(_text_:searching in 224) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03787318 = score(doc=224,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14122958 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03491209 = queryNorm
        0.26816747 = fieldWeight in 224, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=224)
    0.06371414 = product of:
      0.12742828 = sum of:
        0.12742828 = weight(_text_:manuals in 224) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12742828 = score(doc=224,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25905544 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.4202213 = idf(docFreq=71, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03491209 = queryNorm
            0.4918958 = fieldWeight in 224, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.4202213 = idf(docFreq=71, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=224)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

Today, more and more software packages come with online documentation. Some have complete manuals as well. Others have basic documentation on paper and more advanced information online. I recently purchased a computer that came with 20 software programs and not one page of written documentation. More and more, users have to find information by searching online. Most documentation teams focus on writing and ignore the problems of information retrieval, making information in printed documents difficult to find, and online information impossible to find. With online Help, you cannot browse the documentation. You cannot even browse more than a couple of inches of the index at a time. If online users do not get superb guidance into the jungle of online Help, they go away like the hero of Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness, saying "Oh, the horror! The horror!" How does an online Help index work? The following examples are based on the Windows 95 Help-type system, but do not represent actual Help screens

0.030111592 = product of:
  0.09033477 = sum of:
    0.07141435 = weight(_text_:searching in 4824) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07141435 = score(doc=4824,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14122958 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03491209 = queryNorm
        0.5056614 = fieldWeight in 4824, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4824)
    0.018920425 = product of:
      0.03784085 = sum of:
        0.03784085 = weight(_text_:22 in 4824) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03784085 = score(doc=4824,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1222562 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03491209 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4824, 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=4824)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

Describes the InfoAccess Project at the Univ of Saskatchewan Libraries which compared searching of manual and automated indexes by 22 undergraduate psychology students to determine their searching preferences by ranking 'Psychological abstracts' in 3 formats: print, CD-ROM and a locally mounted tape service called InfoAccess. Their satisfaction regarding the physical environment, equipment, and instructional aids was also recorded. Users preferred to search with CD-ROM, but found InfoAccess to be an acceptable alternative

0.020042503 = product of:
  0.060127508 = sum of:
    0.045981724 = product of:
      0.09196345 = sum of:
        0.09196345 = weight(_text_:manuals in 5040) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09196345 = score(doc=5040,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.25905544 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.4202213 = idf(docFreq=71, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03491209 = queryNorm
            0.35499525 = fieldWeight in 5040, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              7.4202213 = idf(docFreq=71, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=5040)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.014145783 = product of:
      0.028291566 = sum of:
        0.028291566 = weight(_text_:etc in 5040) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028291566 = score(doc=5040,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18910104 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03491209 = queryNorm
            0.14961085 = fieldWeight in 5040, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=5040)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Footnote

Facing the Text falls into what I call the third wave of books about back-of-the-book indexing. Each of these waves overlaps, but generally the first consists of the general manuals on indexing books (and other media): Booth, Knight, Mulvany, and Wellisch, along with chapter 18 of the Chicago Manual of Style, 15th ed. These set out the fundamental principles, conventions, or rules of indexing in a mostly impersonal, dispassionate tone. The second wave carried manuals on indexing in specific disciplines and genres: biography, medicine, law, psychology, history, genealogy, etc. The third wave, exemplified by Stauber's Facing the Text and Smith and Kells' Inside Indexing, delves into what goes through the mind of the indexer "facing the text" and putting together an index based on it. The tone is personal and subjective, the authors taking the reader through their own perceptions of the stages of indexing a book, the inevitable problems and subsequent decision making, expressed through their own reactions and reasoning. Facing the Text is not a manual where the newcomer to indexing can find immediate answers to specific problems: the first and second waves of books on indexing are designed to provide those. It's a book for the professional indexer or academic author indexing more than one book; its effect is to hone skills and refine working habits, to increase efficiency and effectiveness, to create indexes that make faithful, logical sense of the text. Newcomers, including first-time academic-author indexers, should begin with the last chapter "Inside an Indexer's Brain," then the second-to-last chapter, "Process"; in fact, I would suggest that any reader begin with "Inside an Indexer's Brain," for its introduction to the terminology and the overall look at indexing, from the first to the last page of the text to be indexed. As one would expect, the index to Facing the Text is comprehensive; in fact, exhaustive, and admirably detailed. The personable, conversational tone continues here, with entries such as "Subheadings/creating as you go" and "Notes to yourself." Of course, "Being stuck" is there as is, and also helpfully doubleposted as "Stuckness strategies." Finally, and on a relatively small note, this is a nicely designed book. Not only is it laid out for looks, it's laid out for use. The type is a friendly size, and the complex structure of headings, subheadings, and sub-subheadings is rendered immediately intelligible by the well-chosen fonts. My only criticism concerns the tightness of the binding; manuals should lie flat, without having to be anchored on each side with paperweights."

0.01839269 = product of:
  0.11035613 = sum of:
    0.11035613 = product of:
      0.22071226 = sum of:
        0.22071226 = weight(_text_:manuals in 214) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.22071226 = score(doc=214,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.25905544 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.4202213 = idf(docFreq=71, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03491209 = queryNorm
            0.85198855 = fieldWeight in 214, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              7.4202213 = idf(docFreq=71, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=214)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

The explosion in personal computing and in computer technology has brought a wealth of opportunities for indexers. Annually, traditional publishers produce numerous books on computer topics, while software and hardware companies constantly issue new products with manuals that require indexes. Indexers can find work with these high-technology publishers or can subcontract with technical documentation firms or with freelance technical writers. The range of audiences for computer-related documents is wide and varied, as is the range of topics. These documents are not limited to end-user software manuals, but include programming, Internet, and networking topics among others. Hardware companies, in addition to computer manufacturers, are also a good potential source of clients. Many hardware products have a sizeable software component that requires its own set of indexed manuals. There are advantages and disadvantages to working with high-technology companies (and their contractors) vs. working with traditional publishers. It is simply a matter of personal taste which type of client you prefer. I have truly enjoyed working with both.

0.016832525 = product of:
  0.100995146 = sum of:
    0.100995146 = weight(_text_:searching in 2302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.100995146 = score(doc=2302,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14122958 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03491209 = queryNorm
        0.7151132 = fieldWeight in 2302, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2302)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

0.014158699 = product of:
  0.08495219 = sum of:
    0.08495219 = product of:
      0.16990438 = sum of:
        0.16990438 = weight(_text_:manuals in 1425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.16990438 = score(doc=1425,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25905544 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.4202213 = idf(docFreq=71, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03491209 = queryNorm
            0.6558611 = fieldWeight in 1425, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.4202213 = idf(docFreq=71, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1425)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

The chapter on indexes in The Chicago Manual of Style serves as a standard for index format and as a self teaching tool for authors and novice indexers. Reviews the 14th ed. for logical sequence, accordance of the guidelines and rules with those of other manuals and authorities, and the quality of its index. It is found wanting in all these areas, but contains much useful information on the indexing process and book index format

0.012609999 = product of:
  0.07565999 = sum of:
    0.07565999 = product of:
      0.15131998 = sum of:
        0.15131998 = weight(_text_:handbooks in 6920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15131998 = score(doc=6920,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2822981 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.085969 = idf(docFreq=36, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03491209 = queryNorm
            0.53602904 = fieldWeight in 6920, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.085969 = idf(docFreq=36, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6920)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

The contents of scientific and technical handbooks often needs fast, reliable and precise subject access, even if the searcher is not familiar with the terminology of the book and has not read it beforehand. This requires careful and expert subject indexing in a highly specific indexing vocabulary, as well as the presentation of the resulting index in a lucid, conceptually transparent manner in print and on disk. Index users, when looking up a general subject heading, often ignore the necessity of looking up the appertaining hierarchically subordinate, more specific subject headings, too. They are either not made aware of these subject headings or their use is felt to be too cumbersome. A classifies approach to computerized subject indexing is described which resembles Ranganathan's Classified Catalogue. Through a variety of peculiarities it leads the searcher rapidly and easily to all subject headings related to a primarily chosen one, and to the postings under all these headings

0.008416262 = product of:
  0.050497573 = sum of:
    0.050497573 = weight(_text_:searching in 1942) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050497573 = score(doc=1942,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14122958 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03491209 = queryNorm
        0.3575566 = fieldWeight in 1942, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1942)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Postcoordination, in which terms are combined at the searching stage rather than at the time of indexing, has been the main form of database access since the 1950s. Reasons for the failure of postcoordinate searches include the absence of specified relationships between terms, the complexity of formulating Boolean searches, and the high frequency of terms in large databases. Recent writers on indexing electronic text have called for precoordination to enhance the precision of retrieval. Among precoordinate indexing structures, a book index with coined modifications is the most precise. The time and cost associated with such customized analysis will, however, limit its application in the electronic environment

0.0073642298 = product of:
  0.044185378 = sum of:
    0.044185378 = weight(_text_:searching in 8087) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044185378 = score(doc=8087,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14122958 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03491209 = queryNorm
        0.31286204 = fieldWeight in 8087, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8087)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Discusses the nature of standards as tools to promote compatibility and improve practice, the role of research versus expert opinion in the creation of standards, the changing scope of standards for indexes in the face of the changing indexing environment, with the increasing use of automatic indexing, electronic displays, and electronic searching of non-displayed indexes. Describes the current draft of the NISO American Standard Guidelines for indexes in information retrieval (Z39.4) in terms of 3 fundamental requirements: syntax, vocabulary management and comprehensive planning and design. Concludes with comments about the nebulous concept of good and accurate indexing and whether and how standards can be used advantageously

0.0073642298 = product of:
  0.044185378 = sum of:
    0.044185378 = weight(_text_:searching in 8266) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044185378 = score(doc=8266,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14122958 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03491209 = queryNorm
        0.31286204 = fieldWeight in 8266, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8266)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

This article discusses the nature of standards as tools to promote compatibiliy and improve practice, the role of research versus expert opinion in the creation of standards, the changing scope of standards for indexes in the face of the changing indexing environment, with the increasing use of automatic indexing, electronic displays, and electronic searching of non-displayed indexes. it describes the current draft of the NISO American Standards Guidelines for Indexes in Information Retrieval (Z39.4) in terms of three fundamental requirements: syntax, vocabulary management, and comprehensive planning and design. The article concludes with comments about the nebulous concept of good and accurate indexing and whether and how standards can be used advantageously

0.0073642298 = product of:
  0.044185378 = sum of:
    0.044185378 = weight(_text_:searching in 6106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044185378 = score(doc=6106,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14122958 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03491209 = queryNorm
        0.31286204 = fieldWeight in 6106, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6106)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Users of the Information Superhighway need signposts to find their way to appropriate, accurate and current information. Given the sheer quantity of information, intellectual indexing is more relevant than ever, complementing and augmenting automatic keyword indexing. Signposts come in various forms including browser bookmarks, local, on-site and remote lists, indexes and directories, temporary search engine results, and metadata. The considerable body of theory on vocabulary control for online database searching can be adapted to index construction for the Internet. At the same time, there are unresolved issues concerning information quality, indexing decisions, and standards

0.0070793494 = product of:
  0.042476095 = sum of:
    0.042476095 = product of:
      0.08495219 = sum of:
        0.08495219 = weight(_text_:manuals in 217) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08495219 = score(doc=217,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25905544 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.4202213 = idf(docFreq=71, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03491209 = queryNorm
            0.32793054 = fieldWeight in 217, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.4202213 = idf(docFreq=71, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=217)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Here's the scenario: Your favorite client calls to tell you they are changing their processes. "We've decided to go completely electronic and embed the indexing in the files. Can you do that?" It looks like your life and the way you do your work is going to change if you say yes. But before you do, make sure you know enough about the new process to know whether you want to take on the project. Embedded indexing brings a whole new level of complexity to the indexing process. You will need to incorporate new software technologies and special editing/index-compiling skills with the traditional thought and analysis that has always gone into the indexing process. What do we mean when we say you can embed indexing into files? The simplest answer is the one that Nancy Mulvany gives in Indexing Books: Embedded indexing software is generally a feature found in word processing or page design software such as WordPerfect or Ventura Publisher. Embedded indexing software allows the indexer to insert index entries (or tags for entries) directly into the document's text files. In other words, instead of writing an index in CINDEX, Macrex, or SkyIndex, you put the index entries directly into the same files that are used to create the book. Many companies use Microsoft Word, PageMaker, FrameMaker, or Quark to create their manuals and books, editing, layout, and printing directly from the program files. Pasting up pages manually and creating galleys are not part of electronic publishing. Everything lives in files, from the time it is written until the time it goes to the publisher's printing plates. When you embed indexing codes into these files, the publisher has no worry about what page numbers go into the index until the very end. If needed, files can go through layout, content and copy-edit changes even after indexing is completed. This approach also permits indexing and text to be re-used in the next edition or even converted into hyperactive links!

0.0063121966 = product of:
  0.03787318 = sum of:
    0.03787318 = weight(_text_:searching in 3807) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03787318 = score(doc=3807,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14122958 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03491209 = queryNorm
        0.26816747 = fieldWeight in 3807, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3807)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

This technical report provides guidelines for the content, organization, and presentation of indexes used for the retrieval of documents and parts of documents. It deals with the principles of indexing, regardless of the type of material indexed, the indexing method used (intellectual analysis, machine algorithm, or both), the medium of the index, or the method of presentation for searching. It emphasizes 4 processes essential for all indexes: comprehensive design, vocabulary management, and the provision of systax. It includes definitions of indexes and of their parts, attributes, and aspects; a uniform vocabulary; treatment of the nature and variety of indexes; and recommendations regarding the design, organization, and presentation of indexes. It does not suggest guidelines for every detail or technique of indexing. These can be determined for each index on the basis of factors covered in the technical report

0.0063121966 = product of:
  0.03787318 = sum of:
    0.03787318 = weight(_text_:searching in 222) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03787318 = score(doc=222,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14122958 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03491209 = queryNorm
        0.26816747 = fieldWeight in 222, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=222)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

<META> tags are used to create meta-information, or information about the information in a Web site. There are many types of <META> tags, but those most relevant to indexing are the description and keyword tags. Description tags provide a short summary of the site contents that are often displayed by search engines when they list search results. Keyword tags are used to define words or phrases that someone using a search engine might use to look for relevant sites. <META> tags are of interest to indexers for two reasons. They provide a means of making your indexing business Web site more visible to those searching the Web for indexing services, and they offer indexers a potential new source of work: writing keyword and description tags for Web site developers and companies with Web sites. <META> tag writing makes good use of an indexer's ability to choose relevant key terms, and the closely related skill of abstracting: conveying the essence of a document in a sentence or two.

0.0063068084 = product of:
  0.03784085 = sum of:
    0.03784085 = product of:
      0.0756817 = sum of:
        0.0756817 = weight(_text_:22 in 263) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0756817 = score(doc=263,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1222562 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03491209 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 263, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=263)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Source

Indexer. 22(2000) no.1, S.25-26

0.0063068084 = product of:
  0.03784085 = sum of:
    0.03784085 = product of:
      0.0756817 = sum of:
        0.0756817 = weight(_text_:22 in 13) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0756817 = score(doc=13,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1222562 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03491209 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 13, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=13)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Source

Indexer. 22(2001) no.3, S.14-18

0.0063068084 = product of:
  0.03784085 = sum of:
    0.03784085 = product of:
      0.0756817 = sum of:
        0.0756817 = weight(_text_:22 in 487) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0756817 = score(doc=487,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1222562 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03491209 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 487, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=487)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Source

Indexer. 22(2000) no.1, S.14-20

0.0063068084 = product of:
  0.03784085 = sum of:
    0.03784085 = product of:
      0.0756817 = sum of:
        0.0756817 = weight(_text_:22 in 4160) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0756817 = score(doc=4160,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1222562 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03491209 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 4160, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4160)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Source

Indexer. 22(2001) no.3, S.135-141

0.0056583136 = product of:
  0.03394988 = sum of:
    0.03394988 = product of:
      0.06789976 = sum of:
        0.06789976 = weight(_text_:etc in 5526) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06789976 = score(doc=5526,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18910104 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03491209 = queryNorm
            0.35906604 = fieldWeight in 5526, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5526)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Vor dem Hintergrund der zunehmenden Verbreitung von Suchmaschinen für bibliothekarische Datenbanken - KvK, KOBV, etc. - ergeben sich aus der unterschiedlichen Konstruktion der angegangenen Indexsysteme einige Probleme: - inkonsistente Suchergebnisse bei scheinbar gleichen Suchschlüsseln Autor: Müller-Udenscheid -> müller, Udenscheid, mueller? - Titelstichworte: sind Zusätze zum Sachtitel indexiert oder nicht? - unterschiedliche Suchschlüssel: Beschränkung auf die kleinste gemeinsame Schnittmenge. Die Verwendung einer einheitlichen Oberfläche gaukelt an dieser Stelle aber konsistente Ergebnisse vor. Auf Grund dieser Ausgangslage hat die KM eine Arbeitsgruppe eingesetzt, die Empfehlungen für eine einheitliche Indexierung bibliothekarischer Datenbanken erarbeiten soll. Diese Arbeitsgruppe hat sich bisher dreimal getroffen und Entwürfe für erste Festlegungen erarbeitet.

0.005518458 = product of:
  0.033110745 = sum of:
    0.033110745 = product of:
      0.06622149 = sum of:
        0.06622149 = weight(_text_:22 in 1061) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06622149 = score(doc=1061,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1222562 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03491209 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 1061, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1061)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Source

Indexer. 11(1978), S.14-22