Search (80 results, page 1 of 4)

  • × theme_ss:"Datenformate"
  1. Matoria, R.K.; Upadhyay, P.K.: Migration of data from one library management system to another : a case study in India (2004) 0.06
    0.056064446 = product of:
      0.19622555 = sum of:
        0.07264129 = weight(_text_:management in 4200) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07264129 = score(doc=4200,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13932906 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.521365 = fieldWeight in 4200, 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=4200)
        0.12358427 = weight(_text_:case in 4200) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12358427 = score(doc=4200,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18173204 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.68003565 = fieldWeight in 4200, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4200)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
  2. Kushwoh, S.S.; Gautam, J.N.; Singh, R.: Migration from CDS / ISIS to KOHA : a case study of data conversion from CCF to MARC 21 (2009) 0.03
    0.030295819 = product of:
      0.10603536 = sum of:
        0.031131983 = weight(_text_:management in 2279) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031131983 = score(doc=2279,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13932906 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 2279, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2279)
        0.07490338 = weight(_text_:case in 2279) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07490338 = score(doc=2279,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18173204 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.41216385 = fieldWeight in 2279, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2279)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    Standards are important for quality and interoperability in any system. Bibliographic record creation standards such as MARC 21 (Machine Readable Catalogue), CCF (Common Communication Format), UNIMARC (Universal MARC) and their local variations, are in practice all across the library community. ILMS (Integrated Library Management Systems) are using these standards for the design of databases and the creation of bibliographic records. Their use is important for uniformity of the system and bibliographic data, but there are problems when a library wants to switch over from one system to another using different standards. This paper discusses migration from one record standard to another, mapping of data and related issues. Data exported from CDS/ISIS CCF based records to KOHA MARC 21 based records are discussed as a case study. This methodology, with few modifications, can be applied for migration of data in other bibliographicformats too. Freeware tools can be utilized for migration.
  3. Carini, P.; Shepherd, K.: ¬The MARC standard and encoded archival description (2004) 0.03
    0.026577614 = product of:
      0.093021646 = sum of:
        0.07061958 = weight(_text_:case in 2830) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07061958 = score(doc=2830,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18173204 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.3885918 = fieldWeight in 2830, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2830)
        0.02240206 = product of:
          0.04480412 = sum of:
            0.04480412 = weight(_text_:22 in 2830) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04480412 = score(doc=2830,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14475311 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041336425 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2830, 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=2830)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    This case study details the evolution of descriptive practices and standards used in the Mount Holyoke College Archives and the Five College Finding Aids Access Project, discusses the relationship of Encoded Archival Description (EAD) and the MARC standard in reference to archival description, and addresses the challenges and opportunities of transferring data from one metadata standard to another. The study demonstrates that greater standardization in archival description allows archivists to respond more effectively to technological change.
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1, S.18-27
  4. Kurth, M.; Ruddy, D.; Rupp, N.: Repurposing MARC metadata : using digital project experience to develop a metadata management design (2004) 0.02
    0.024689937 = product of:
      0.08641478 = sum of:
        0.06961323 = weight(_text_:management in 4748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06961323 = score(doc=4748,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.13932906 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.49963182 = fieldWeight in 4748, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4748)
        0.016801544 = product of:
          0.033603087 = sum of:
            0.033603087 = weight(_text_:22 in 4748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.033603087 = score(doc=4748,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14475311 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041336425 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4748, 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=4748)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    Metadata and information technology staff in libraries that are building digital collections typically extract and manipulate MARC metadata sets to provide access to digital content via non-MARC schemes. Metadata processing in these libraries involves defining the relationships between metadata schemes, moving metadata between schemes, and coordinating the intellectual activity and physical resources required to create and manipulate metadata. Actively managing the non-MARC metadata resources used to build digital collections is something most of these libraries have only begun to do. This article proposes strategies for managing MARC metadata repurposing efforts as the first step in a coordinated approach to library metadata management. Guided by lessons learned from Cornell University library mapping and transformation activities, the authors apply the literature of data resource management to library metadata management and propose a model for managing MARC metadata repurposing processes through the implementation of a metadata management design.
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.144-152
  5. Snow, M.: Visual depictions and the use of MARC : a view from the trenches of slide librarianship (1989) 0.02
    0.015977843 = product of:
      0.05592245 = sum of:
        0.036320645 = weight(_text_:management in 2862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.036320645 = score(doc=2862,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13932906 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.2606825 = fieldWeight in 2862, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2862)
        0.019601801 = product of:
          0.039203603 = sum of:
            0.039203603 = weight(_text_:22 in 2862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.039203603 = score(doc=2862,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14475311 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041336425 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2862, 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=2862)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    Paper presented at a symposium on 'Implementing the Art and Architecture Thesaurus (AAT): Controlled Vocabulary in the Extended MARC format', held at the 1989 Annual Conference of the Art Libraries Society of North America. The only way to get bibliographic records on to campus on-line library catalogues, and slide records on the national bibliographic utilities, is through the use of MARC. Discusses the importance of having individual slide and photograph records on the national bibliographic utilities, and considers the obstacles which currently make this difficult. Discusses mapping to MARC from data base management systems.
    Date
    4.12.1995 22:51:36
  6. Gopinath, M.A.: Standardization for resource sharing databases (1995) 0.01
    0.014711247 = product of:
      0.10297872 = sum of:
        0.10297872 = sum of:
          0.058174606 = weight(_text_:studies in 4414) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.058174606 = score(doc=4414,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16494368 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041336425 = queryNorm
              0.35269377 = fieldWeight in 4414, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4414)
          0.04480412 = weight(_text_:22 in 4414) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.04480412 = score(doc=4414,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.14475311 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.041336425 = queryNorm
              0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4414, 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=4414)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Abstract
    It is helpful and essential to adopt standards for bibliographic information, project description and institutional information which are shareable for access to information resources within a country. Describes a strategy for adopting international standards of bibliographic information exchange for developing a resource sharing facilitation database in India. A list of 22 ISO standards for information processing is included
    Source
    Library science with a slant to documentation and information studies. 32(1995) no.3, S.i-iv
  7. Tosaka, Y.; Park, J.-r.: RDA: Resource description & access : a survey of the current state of the art (2013) 0.01
    0.012606538 = product of:
      0.044122882 = sum of:
        0.025943318 = weight(_text_:management in 677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025943318 = score(doc=677,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13932906 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 677, 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=677)
        0.018179566 = product of:
          0.03635913 = sum of:
            0.03635913 = weight(_text_:studies in 677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03635913 = score(doc=677,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16494368 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041336425 = queryNorm
                0.22043361 = fieldWeight in 677, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=677)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    Resource Description & Access (RDA) is intended to provide a flexible and extensible framework that can accommodate all types of content and media within rapidly evolving digital environments while also maintaining compatibility with the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules, 2nd edition (AACR2). The cataloging community is grappling with practical issues in navigating the transition from AACR2 to RDA; there is a definite need to evaluate major subject areas and broader themes in information organization under the new RDA paradigm. This article aims to accomplish this task through a thorough and critical review of the emerging RDA literature published from 2005 to 2011. The review mostly concerns key areas of difference between RDA and AACR2, the relationship of the new cataloging code to metadata standards, the impact on encoding standards such as Machine-Readable Cataloging (MARC), end user considerations, and practitioners' views on RDA implementation and training. Future research will require more in-depth studies of RDA's expected benefits and the manner in which the new cataloging code will improve resource retrieval and bibliographic control for users and catalogers alike over AACR2. The question as to how the cataloging community can best move forward to the post-AACR2/MARC environment must be addressed carefully so as to chart the future of bibliographic control in the evolving environment of information production, management, and use.
  8. Simmons, P.: Microcomputer software for ISO 2709 record conversion (1989) 0.01
    0.011859803 = product of:
      0.08301862 = sum of:
        0.08301862 = weight(_text_:management in 2) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08301862 = score(doc=2,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13932906 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.5958457 = fieldWeight in 2, 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=2)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Source
    Microcomputers for information management. 6(1989), S.197-205
  9. McBride, J.L.: Faceted subject access for music through USMARC : a case for linked fields (2000) 0.01
    0.007566384 = product of:
      0.052964687 = sum of:
        0.052964687 = weight(_text_:case in 5403) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.052964687 = score(doc=5403,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18173204 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.29144385 = fieldWeight in 5403, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5403)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
  10. Zschau, O.: ¬Eine Sprache für alle Fälle (2000) 0.01
    0.007412377 = product of:
      0.051886637 = sum of:
        0.051886637 = weight(_text_:management in 4960) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.051886637 = score(doc=4960,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13932906 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.37240356 = fieldWeight in 4960, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4960)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Content
    Vgl. als Verbindung zu Content-Management-Systemen: Contentmanager.de
  11. Jolibois, S.: ¬La gestion informatisée de corpus bibliographiques : adaption des normes et formats documentaires (2000) 0.01
    0.007412377 = product of:
      0.051886637 = sum of:
        0.051886637 = weight(_text_:management in 941) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.051886637 = score(doc=941,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13932906 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.37240356 = fieldWeight in 941, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=941)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Footnote
    Übers. des Titels: Adaptation of standards and formats to the computerized management of bibliographic records
  12. Jimenez, V.O.R.: Nuevas perspectivas para la catalogacion : metadatos ver MARC (1999) 0.01
    0.00678885 = product of:
      0.047521945 = sum of:
        0.047521945 = product of:
          0.09504389 = sum of:
            0.09504389 = weight(_text_:22 in 5743) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09504389 = score(doc=5743,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.14475311 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041336425 = queryNorm
                0.6565931 = fieldWeight in 5743, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5743)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Date
    30. 3.2002 19:45:22
    Source
    Revista Española de Documentaçion Cientifica. 22(1999) no.2, S.198-219
  13. MARC and metadata : METS, MODS, and MARCXML: current and future implications (2004) 0.01
    0.0064005884 = product of:
      0.04480412 = sum of:
        0.04480412 = product of:
          0.08960824 = sum of:
            0.08960824 = weight(_text_:22 in 2840) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08960824 = score(doc=2840,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14475311 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041336425 = queryNorm
                0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 2840, 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=2840)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1
  14. METS: an overview & tutorial : Metadata Encoding & Transmission Standard (METS) (2001) 0.01
    0.006289611 = product of:
      0.044027276 = sum of:
        0.044027276 = weight(_text_:management in 1323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.044027276 = score(doc=1323,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.13932906 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.31599492 = fieldWeight in 1323, 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=1323)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Abstract
    Maintaining a library of digital objects of necessaryy requires maintaining metadata about those objects. The metadata necessary for successful management and use of digital objeets is both more extensive than and different from the metadata used for managing collections of printed works and other physical materials. While a library may record descriptive metadata regarding a book in its collection, the book will not dissolve into a series of unconnected pages if the library fails to record structural metadata regarding the book's organization, nor will scholars be unable to evaluate the book's worth if the library fails to note that the book was produced using a Ryobi offset press. The Same cannot be said for a digital version of the saure book. Without structural metadata, the page image or text files comprising the digital work are of little use, and without technical metadata regarding the digitization process, scholars may be unsure of how accurate a reflection of the original the digital version provides. For internal management purposes, a library must have access to appropriate technical metadata in order to periodically refresh and migrate the data, ensuring the durability of valuable resources.
  15. Temmerman, P.: ISAD(G): de definitieve standaard? (1994) 0.01
    0.0059299017 = product of:
      0.04150931 = sum of:
        0.04150931 = weight(_text_:management in 7797) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04150931 = score(doc=7797,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13932906 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.29792285 = fieldWeight in 7797, 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=7797)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Abstract
    Despite the extensive use of automation for archive management the creation of ISAD(G) (General International Standard Archival Description) was only accepted in January 1992. A special adaptation of the ISBD had already enabled a start to be made on creating MARC format records for archive collections. ISAD(G) will facilitate the exchange of data among collections. Whether the new standard will be suitable for all forms of archive depends on the willingness of archivists to adopt new technology
  16. Shaw, D.: Automating access to bibliographic information (1996) 0.01
    0.0059299017 = product of:
      0.04150931 = sum of:
        0.04150931 = weight(_text_:management in 4351) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04150931 = score(doc=4351,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13932906 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.29792285 = fieldWeight in 4351, 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=4351)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Source
    Technical services management: 1965-1990. A quarter of a century of change and a look into the future. Festschrift for Kathryn Luther Henderson. Ed.: L.C. Smith et al
  17. Reinke, U.: ¬Der Austausch terminologischer Daten (1993) 0.01
    0.0059299017 = product of:
      0.04150931 = sum of:
        0.04150931 = weight(_text_:management in 4608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04150931 = score(doc=4608,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13932906 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.29792285 = fieldWeight in 4608, 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=4608)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Abstract
    Diplomarbeit at the University of Saarbrücken which contains the following topics: data exchange format; terminology management systems; terminological databases; terminological record; data elements; data categories; data fields, etc.: hard- and software-related difficulties for the structure of records; description of approaches for the development of an exchange format for terminological data (MATER, MicroMATER, NTRF, SGML); considerations concerning an SGML-like exchange format; perspectives
  18. MARC and metadata : METS, MODS, and MARCXML: current and future implications (2004) 0.01
    0.005600515 = product of:
      0.039203603 = sum of:
        0.039203603 = product of:
          0.078407206 = sum of:
            0.078407206 = weight(_text_:22 in 7196) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.078407206 = score(doc=7196,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14475311 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041336425 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 7196, 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=7196)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1
  19. Geißelmann, F.: Arbeitsergebnisse der Arbeitsgruppe Codes (2000) 0.01
    0.005600515 = product of:
      0.039203603 = sum of:
        0.039203603 = product of:
          0.078407206 = sum of:
            0.078407206 = weight(_text_:22 in 4973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.078407206 = score(doc=4973,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14475311 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041336425 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4973, 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=4973)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Date
    26. 8.2000 19:22:35
  20. Weber, R.: "Functional requirements for bibliographic records" und Regelwerksentwicklung (2001) 0.01
    0.005600515 = product of:
      0.039203603 = sum of:
        0.039203603 = product of:
          0.078407206 = sum of:
            0.078407206 = weight(_text_:22 in 6838) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.078407206 = score(doc=6838,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14475311 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041336425 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6838, 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=6838)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Source
    Dialog mit Bibliotheken. 13(2001) H.3, S.20-22

Years

Languages

  • e 57
  • d 17
  • f 3
  • nl 1
  • pl 1
  • sp 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 67
  • s 6
  • m 4
  • b 2
  • el 2
  • x 2
  • n 1
  • More… Less…