-
Zhang, J.; Dimitroff, A.: Internet search engines' response to Metadata Dublin Core implementation (2005)
0.04
0.044713248 = product of:
0.17885299 = sum of:
0.17885299 = weight(_text_:engines in 4652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.17885299 = score(doc=4652,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22757743 = queryWeight, product of:
5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
0.04479146 = queryNorm
0.7858995 = fieldWeight in 4652, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4652)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
-
Perkins, M.: Why don't search engines work better? (1997)
0.04
0.038722813 = product of:
0.15489125 = sum of:
0.15489125 = weight(_text_:engines in 753) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.15489125 = score(doc=753,freq=6.0), product of:
0.22757743 = queryWeight, product of:
5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
0.04479146 = queryNorm
0.68060905 = fieldWeight in 753, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=753)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Despite the proliferation of new search engines and improvements to existing ones, their use with the WWW continues to produce innumerable false hits. The reason for this is that HTML is mainly a presentation tool, and does a fairly poor job of describing the contents of a document while search engines are a long way from artificial intelligence. The use of SGML would ease the problem considerably, but is much more complex and time consuming to learn to be of general use. The alternative 'metadata' approach is proving slow to get off the ground. Researchers are investigating these and various other lines of enquiry
-
Henshaw, R.; Valauskas, E.J.: Metadata as a catalyst: : experiments with metadata and search engines in the Internet journal, First Monday (2001)
0.04
0.03832564 = product of:
0.15330257 = sum of:
0.15330257 = weight(_text_:engines in 7098) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.15330257 = score(doc=7098,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22757743 = queryWeight, product of:
5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
0.04479146 = queryNorm
0.67362815 = fieldWeight in 7098, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=7098)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
-
Turner, T.P.; Brackbill, L.: Rising to the top : evaluating the use of HTML META tag to improve retrieval of World Wide Web documents through Internet search engines (1998)
0.03
0.03319098 = product of:
0.13276392 = sum of:
0.13276392 = weight(_text_:engines in 5230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.13276392 = score(doc=5230,freq=6.0), product of:
0.22757743 = queryWeight, product of:
5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
0.04479146 = queryNorm
0.58337915 = fieldWeight in 5230, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5230)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Reports results of a study to evaluate the effectiveness of using the HTML META tag to improve retrieval of World Wide Web documents through Internet search engines. 20 documents were created in 5 subject areas: agricultural trade; farm business statistics; poultry statistics; vegetable statistics; and cotton statistics. 4 pages were created in each subject area: one with no META tags, one with a META tag using the keywords attribute, one with a META tag using the description attribute, and one with META tags using both the keywords and description attributes. Searches were performed in Alta Vista and Infoseek to find terms common to all pages as well as for each keyword term contained in the META tag. Analysis of the searches suggests that use of the keywords attribute in a META tag substantially improves accessibility while use of the description attribute alone does not. Concludes that HTML document authors should consider using keywords attribute META tags and suggests that more search engines index the META tag to improve resource discovery
-
What is Schema.org? (2011)
0.03
0.03319098 = product of:
0.13276392 = sum of:
0.13276392 = weight(_text_:engines in 4437) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.13276392 = score(doc=4437,freq=6.0), product of:
0.22757743 = queryWeight, product of:
5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
0.04479146 = queryNorm
0.58337915 = fieldWeight in 4437, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4437)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- This site provides a collection of schemas, i.e., html tags, that webmasters can use to markup their pages in ways recognized by major search providers. Search engines including Bing, Google and Yahoo! rely on this markup to improve the display of search results, making it easier for people to find the right web pages. Many sites are generated from structured data, which is often stored in databases. When this data is formatted into HTML, it becomes very difficult to recover the original structured data. Many applications, especially search engines, can benefit greatly from direct access to this structured data. On-page markup enables search engines to understand the information on web pages and provide richer search results in order to make it easier for users to find relevant information on the web. Markup can also enable new tools and applications that make use of the structure. A shared markup vocabulary makes easier for webmasters to decide on a markup schema and get the maximum benefit for their efforts. So, in the spirit of sitemaps.org, Bing, Google and Yahoo! have come together to provide a shared collection of schemas that webmasters can use.
-
Roux, M.: Metadata for search engines : what can be learned from e-Sciences? (2012)
0.03
0.03319098 = product of:
0.13276392 = sum of:
0.13276392 = weight(_text_:engines in 96) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.13276392 = score(doc=96,freq=6.0), product of:
0.22757743 = queryWeight, product of:
5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
0.04479146 = queryNorm
0.58337915 = fieldWeight in 96, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=96)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Footnote
- Vgl.: http://www.igi-global.com/book/next-generation-search-engines/64420.
- Source
- Next generation search engines: advanced models for information retrieval. Eds.: C. Jouis, u.a
-
Dawson, A.: Creating metadata that work for digital libraries and Google (2004)
0.02
0.022356624 = product of:
0.089426495 = sum of:
0.089426495 = weight(_text_:engines in 4762) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.089426495 = score(doc=4762,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22757743 = queryWeight, product of:
5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
0.04479146 = queryNorm
0.39294976 = fieldWeight in 4762, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4762)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- For many years metadata has been recognised as a significant component of the digital information environment. Substantial work has gone into creating complex metadata schemes for describing digital content. Yet increasingly Web search engines, and Google in particular, are the primary means of discovering and selecting digital resources, although they make little use of metadata. This article considers how digital libraries can gain more value from their metadata by adapting it for Google users, while still following well-established principles and standards for cataloguing and digital preservation.
-
Gardner, T.; Iannella, R.: Architecture and software solutions (2000)
0.01
0.0060686246 = product of:
0.024274498 = sum of:
0.024274498 = product of:
0.048548996 = sum of:
0.048548996 = weight(_text_:22 in 4867) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048548996 = score(doc=4867,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15685207 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04479146 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4867, 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=4867)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 22. 6.2002 19:38:24
-
Peereboom, M.: DutchESS : Dutch Electronic Subject Service - a Dutch national collaborative effort (2000)
0.01
0.0060686246 = product of:
0.024274498 = sum of:
0.024274498 = product of:
0.048548996 = sum of:
0.048548996 = weight(_text_:22 in 4869) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048548996 = score(doc=4869,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15685207 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04479146 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4869, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4869)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 22. 6.2002 19:39:23
-
Heery, R.: Information gateways : collaboration and content (2000)
0.01
0.0053100465 = product of:
0.021240186 = sum of:
0.021240186 = product of:
0.042480372 = sum of:
0.042480372 = weight(_text_:22 in 4866) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042480372 = score(doc=4866,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15685207 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04479146 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4866, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4866)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 22. 6.2002 19:38:54
