-
Broccoli, K.; Ravenswaay, G.V.: Web indexing : anchors away! (2000)
0.02
0.01916282 = product of:
0.07665128 = sum of:
0.07665128 = weight(_text_:engines in 219) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07665128 = score(doc=219,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22757743 = queryWeight, product of:
5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
0.04479146 = queryNorm
0.33681408 = fieldWeight in 219, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=219)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- In this chapter we turn to embedded indexing for the Internet, frequently called Web indexing. We will define Web indexes; describe the structure of entries for Web indexes; present some of the challenges that Web indexers face; and compare Web indexes to search engines. One of the difficulties in defining Web indexes is their relative newness. The first pages were placed on the World Wide Web in 1991 when Tim Berners Lee, its founder, uploaded four files. We are in a period of transition, moving from using well-established forms of writing and communications to others that are still in their infancy. Paramount among these is the Web. For indexers, this is an uncharted voyage where we must jettison firmly established ideas while developing new ones. Where the voyage will end is anyone's guess.
-
Rowland, M.J.: <Meta> tags (2000)
0.02
0.01916282 = product of:
0.07665128 = sum of:
0.07665128 = weight(_text_:engines in 222) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07665128 = score(doc=222,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22757743 = queryWeight, product of:
5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
0.04479146 = queryNorm
0.33681408 = fieldWeight in 222, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=222)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- 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.
-
Moncrief, L.: Indexing computer-related documents (2000)
0.02
0.015949111 = product of:
0.063796446 = sum of:
0.063796446 = product of:
0.12759289 = sum of:
0.12759289 = weight(_text_:programming in 214) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.12759289 = score(doc=214,freq=2.0), product of:
0.29361802 = queryWeight, product of:
6.5552235 = idf(docFreq=170, maxDocs=44218)
0.04479146 = queryNorm
0.43455404 = fieldWeight in 214, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.5552235 = idf(docFreq=170, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=214)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- 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.
-
Ross, J.: ¬The impact of technology on indexing (2000)
0.01
0.012137249 = product of:
0.048548996 = sum of:
0.048548996 = product of:
0.09709799 = sum of:
0.09709799 = weight(_text_:22 in 263) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09709799 = score(doc=263,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15685207 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04479146 = 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)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Indexer. 22(2000) no.1, S.25-26
-
Walker, A.: Indexing commonplace books : John Locke's method (2001)
0.01
0.012137249 = product of:
0.048548996 = sum of:
0.048548996 = product of:
0.09709799 = sum of:
0.09709799 = weight(_text_:22 in 13) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09709799 = score(doc=13,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15685207 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04479146 = 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)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Indexer. 22(2001) no.3, S.14-18
-
Crystal, D.: Quote index unquote (2000)
0.01
0.012137249 = product of:
0.048548996 = sum of:
0.048548996 = product of:
0.09709799 = sum of:
0.09709799 = weight(_text_:22 in 487) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09709799 = score(doc=487,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15685207 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04479146 = 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)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Indexer. 22(2000) no.1, S.14-20
-
Matthews, D.: Indexing published letters (2001)
0.01
0.012137249 = product of:
0.048548996 = sum of:
0.048548996 = product of:
0.09709799 = sum of:
0.09709799 = weight(_text_:22 in 4160) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09709799 = score(doc=4160,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15685207 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04479146 = 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)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Indexer. 22(2001) no.3, S.135-141
-
Davis, M.: Building a global legal index : a work in progress (2001)
0.01
0.010620093 = product of:
0.042480372 = sum of:
0.042480372 = product of:
0.084960744 = sum of:
0.084960744 = weight(_text_:22 in 6443) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.084960744 = score(doc=6443,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15685207 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04479146 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6443, 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=6443)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Indexer. 22(2001) no.3, S.123-127
-
Browne, G.: ¬The definite article : acknowledging The in index entries (2001)
0.01
0.010620093 = product of:
0.042480372 = sum of:
0.042480372 = product of:
0.084960744 = sum of:
0.084960744 = weight(_text_:22 in 12) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.084960744 = score(doc=12,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15685207 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04479146 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 12, 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=12)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Indexer. 22(2001) no.3, S.119-122
-
Weinberg, B.H.: Book indexes in France : medieval specimens and modern practices (2000)
0.01
0.010620093 = product of:
0.042480372 = sum of:
0.042480372 = product of:
0.084960744 = sum of:
0.084960744 = weight(_text_:22 in 486) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.084960744 = score(doc=486,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15685207 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04479146 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 486, 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=486)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Indexer. 22(2000) no.1, S.2-13
-
Mauer, P.: Embedded indexing : pros and cons for the indexer (2000)
0.01
0.010620093 = product of:
0.042480372 = sum of:
0.042480372 = product of:
0.084960744 = sum of:
0.084960744 = weight(_text_:22 in 488) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.084960744 = score(doc=488,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15685207 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04479146 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 488, 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=488)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Indexer. 22(2000) no.1, S.27-28
-
Anderson, C.R.: Indexing with a computer : past and present (2000)
0.01
0.010620093 = product of:
0.042480372 = sum of:
0.042480372 = product of:
0.084960744 = sum of:
0.084960744 = weight(_text_:22 in 489) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.084960744 = score(doc=489,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15685207 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04479146 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 489, 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=489)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Indexer. 22(2000) no.1, S.23-24
-
Lee, D.: Judging indexes : the criteria for a good index (2001)
0.01
0.010620093 = product of:
0.042480372 = sum of:
0.042480372 = product of:
0.084960744 = sum of:
0.084960744 = weight(_text_:22 in 4162) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.084960744 = score(doc=4162,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15685207 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04479146 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4162, 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=4162)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Indexer. 22(2001) no.4, S.191-194
-
Weinberg, B.H.: Predecessors of scientific indexing structures in the domain of religion (2001)
0.01
0.010620093 = product of:
0.042480372 = sum of:
0.042480372 = product of:
0.084960744 = sum of:
0.084960744 = weight(_text_:22 in 4172) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.084960744 = score(doc=4172,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15685207 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04479146 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4172, 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=4172)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Indexer. 22(2001) no.4, S.178-180
-
Weinberg, B.H.: Index structures in early Hebrew Biblical word lists : preludes to the first Latin concordances (2004)
0.01
0.010620093 = product of:
0.042480372 = sum of:
0.042480372 = product of:
0.084960744 = sum of:
0.084960744 = weight(_text_:22 in 4180) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.084960744 = score(doc=4180,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15685207 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04479146 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4180, 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=4180)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 17.10.2005 13:54:22
-
Olason, S.C.: Let's get usable! : Usability studies for indexes (2000)
0.01
0.008582331 = product of:
0.034329325 = sum of:
0.034329325 = product of:
0.06865865 = sum of:
0.06865865 = weight(_text_:22 in 882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06865865 = score(doc=882,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15685207 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04479146 = queryNorm
0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 882, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=882)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Footnote
- Vgl.: http://www.theindexer.org/files/22-2-olason.pdf.
- Source
- Indexer. 22(2000) no.2, S.91-95
-
Bell, H.K.: History of societies of indexing : part VII: 1992-95 (2000)
0.01
0.007585781 = product of:
0.030343125 = sum of:
0.030343125 = product of:
0.06068625 = sum of:
0.06068625 = weight(_text_:22 in 113) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06068625 = score(doc=113,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15685207 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04479146 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 113, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=113)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Indexer. 22(2000) no.2, S.81-83
-
Rooney, P.: How I reused my own index (2007)
0.01
0.0060686246 = product of:
0.024274498 = sum of:
0.024274498 = product of:
0.048548996 = sum of:
0.048548996 = weight(_text_:22 in 737) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048548996 = score(doc=737,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15685207 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04479146 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 737, 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=737)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 8.12.2007 18:41:22
-
Dextre Clarke, S.G.: Evolution towards ISO 25964 : an international standard with guidelines for thesauri and other types of controlled vocabulary (2007)
0.01
0.0053100465 = product of:
0.021240186 = sum of:
0.021240186 = product of:
0.042480372 = sum of:
0.042480372 = weight(_text_:22 in 749) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042480372 = score(doc=749,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15685207 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04479146 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 749, 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=749)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 8.12.2007 19:25:22
-
Miksa, F.: ¬The DDC Relative Index (2006)
0.00
0.0037928906 = product of:
0.015171562 = sum of:
0.015171562 = product of:
0.030343125 = sum of:
0.030343125 = weight(_text_:22 in 5775) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030343125 = score(doc=5775,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15685207 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04479146 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5775, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5775)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- The "Relative Index" of the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) is investigated over the span of its lifetime in 22 editions of the DDC as to its character as a concept indexing system, its provision of conceptual contexts for the terms it lists, and the way in which the index intersects with special tables of categories used in the system. Striking features of the index that are discussed include how the locater function of an index is expressed in it, its practice of including concepts that have not been given specific notational locations in the system, its two methods of providing conceptual contexts for indexed terms (by means of the notation of the system and by the insertion of enhancement terms that portray conceptual context), and how the index has intersected with three types of special tables of categories in the system. Critical issues raised include the indexing of constructed or synthesized complex concepts, inconsistencies in how enhancement terms are portrayed and the absence of them in some instances, the problem of equating conceptual context with disciplinary context, and problems associated with not indexing one type of special table. Summary and conclusions are extended to problems that arise in studying the index.
