Search (34 results, page 1 of 2)

0.11218452 = product of:
  0.16827677 = sum of:
    0.08135357 = weight(_text_:search in 753) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08135357 = score(doc=753,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.46558946 = fieldWeight in 753, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=753)
    0.086923204 = product of:
      0.17384641 = sum of:
        0.17384641 = weight(_text_:engines in 753) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.17384641 = score(doc=753,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.25542772 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

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

0.09615815 = product of:
  0.14423722 = sum of:
    0.06973162 = weight(_text_:search in 5230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06973162 = score(doc=5230,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.39907667 = fieldWeight in 5230, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5230)
    0.074505605 = product of:
      0.14901121 = sum of:
        0.14901121 = weight(_text_:engines in 5230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14901121 = score(doc=5230,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.25542772 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

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

0.074022576 = product of:
  0.11103386 = sum of:
    0.053679425 = weight(_text_:search in 2585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.053679425 = score(doc=2585,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.30720934 = fieldWeight in 2585, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2585)
    0.057354435 = product of:
      0.11470887 = sum of:
        0.11470887 = weight(_text_:engines in 2585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11470887 = score(doc=2585,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25542772 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.44908544 = fieldWeight in 2585, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2585)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The goal of the State Library of Queensland's Metadata Project is the deployment of metadata using the Dublin Core Metadata Element Set in the State Library' WWW Web pages. The deployment of metadata is expected to improve resource discovery by Internet users, through provision of index information (metadata) in State Library Web pages which is then available to search engines for indexing. The project is also an initial attempt to set standards for metadata deployment in queensland libraries Web pages

0.06476976 = product of:
  0.09715463 = sum of:
    0.0469695 = weight(_text_:search in 902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0469695 = score(doc=902,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.2688082 = fieldWeight in 902, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=902)
    0.05018513 = product of:
      0.10037026 = sum of:
        0.10037026 = weight(_text_:engines in 902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10037026 = score(doc=902,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25542772 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.39294976 = fieldWeight in 902, 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=902)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

A crucial question for librarians is whether to catalogue Internet information sources, and electronic sources in general, which may contain metainformation of the texts of articles. Librarians can help researchers with data identification and access in 4 ways: making OPAC available on the Internet; providing a complete selection of Gopher, Ftp, WWW, etc. site lists; maintaining a Web site, coordinateted by the library, that functions as an Internet access point; and organising access to existing search engines that do automatic indexing. Briefly reviews several metadata formats, including USMARC field 856, IAFA templates, SOIP (Harvest), TEI Headers, Capcas Head and URC

0.06476976 = product of:
  0.09715463 = sum of:
    0.0469695 = weight(_text_:search in 2221) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0469695 = score(doc=2221,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.2688082 = fieldWeight in 2221, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2221)
    0.05018513 = product of:
      0.10037026 = sum of:
        0.10037026 = weight(_text_:engines in 2221) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10037026 = score(doc=2221,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25542772 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.39294976 = fieldWeight in 2221, 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=2221)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Emphasizes the increased importance of the role of the librarian as a 'human' interface in the organization and retrieval of resources in the networked environment. Comments on the recent increase in metadata and compares the long established MARC format and adaptations of MARC with several other alternative metadata systems. Outlines the use of embedded META tag information in HTML documents and describes how existing search engines find and index resources on the WWW, with their pros and cons. Discusses the implications for effective research of the inherent limitations of these automated indexing schemes

0.06476976 = product of:
  0.09715463 = sum of:
    0.0469695 = weight(_text_:search in 5201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0469695 = score(doc=5201,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.2688082 = fieldWeight in 5201, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5201)
    0.05018513 = product of:
      0.10037026 = sum of:
        0.10037026 = weight(_text_:engines in 5201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10037026 = score(doc=5201,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25542772 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.39294976 = fieldWeight in 5201, 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=5201)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

In order to test the power of metadata on information retrieval, an experiment was designed and conducted on a group of 7 graduate students using the Dublin Core as the cataloguing metadata. Results show that, on average, the retrieval error rate is only 2.9 per cent for the MES system (http://140.136.85.194), which utilizes the Dublin Core to describe the documents on the World Wide Web, in contrast to 20.7 per cent for the 7 famous search engines including HOTBOT, GAIS, LYCOS, EXCITE, INFOSEEK, YAHOO, and OCTOPUS. The very low error rate indicates that the users can use the information of the Dublin Core to decide whether to retrieve the documents or not

0.05551693 = product of:
  0.08327539 = sum of:
    0.04025957 = weight(_text_:search in 528) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04025957 = score(doc=528,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.230407 = fieldWeight in 528, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=528)
    0.043015826 = product of:
      0.08603165 = sum of:
        0.08603165 = weight(_text_:engines in 528) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08603165 = score(doc=528,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25542772 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.33681408 = fieldWeight in 528, 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=528)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Subject oriented information sources on the Internet remain relativley unstructured despite attempts at indexing them and despite the use of search engines to index sources in a collective database and to retrieve relevant information sources. Describes the rationale for developing a means to capture and structure Internet resources for scientific research use in a clearinghouse, and methods for retrieval, information filtering, and structuring subject orientated information sources from the Internet for specific user groups. Discusses the issues of design, maintenance, implementation of metadata, and obtaining use feedback. Cooperation among several institutions involved in the German national subject special collections (SSG) library support programme of the DFG have led to recommendations to expand this programme to include coordination of collective Internet subject information sites. In addition to the compilation of subject oriented information sites on the Internet by library and information staff, connection to other value added services serve to make processes of information searching, retrieval, acquisition, and evaluation more effective for researchers

0.05551693 = product of:
  0.08327539 = sum of:
    0.04025957 = weight(_text_:search in 3589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04025957 = score(doc=3589,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.230407 = fieldWeight in 3589, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3589)
    0.043015826 = product of:
      0.08603165 = sum of:
        0.08603165 = weight(_text_:engines in 3589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08603165 = score(doc=3589,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25542772 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.33681408 = fieldWeight in 3589, 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=3589)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Reports results of a study of 4 WWW search engines: AltaVista; Lycos; Excite and WebCrawler to collect data on Web objects on polymer chemistry. 1.037 Web objects were examined for data in 4 categories: document information; use of meta fields; use of images and use of chemical names. Issues raised included: whether to provide metadata elements for parts of entities or whole entities only, the use of metasyntax, problems in representation of special types of objects, and whether links should be considered when encoding metadata. Use of metafields was not widespread in the sample and knowledge of metafields in HTML varied greatly among Web object creators. The study formed part of a metadata project funded by the OCLC Library and Information Science Research Grant Program

0.03238488 = product of:
  0.048577316 = sum of:
    0.02348475 = weight(_text_:search in 1257) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02348475 = score(doc=1257,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.1344041 = fieldWeight in 1257, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1257)
    0.025092565 = product of:
      0.05018513 = sum of:
        0.05018513 = weight(_text_:engines in 1257) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05018513 = score(doc=1257,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25542772 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.19647488 = fieldWeight in 1257, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1257)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Over the past three years, the Dublin Core Metadata Initiative has achieved a broad international consensus on the semantics of a simple element set for describing electronic resources. Since the first workshop in March 1995, which was reported in the very first issue of D-Lib Magazine, Dublin Core has been the topic of perhaps a dozen articles here. Originally intended to be simple and intuitive enough for authors to tag Web pages without special training, Dublin Core is being adapted now for more specialized uses, from government information and legal deposit to museum informatics and electronic commerce. To meet such specialized requirements, Dublin Core can be customized with additional elements or qualifiers. However, these refinements can compromise interoperability across applications. There are tradeoffs between using specific terms that precisely meet local needs versus general terms that are understood more widely. We can better understand this inevitable tension between simplicity and complexity if we recognize that metadata is a form of human language. With Dublin Core, as with a natural language, people are inclined to stretch definitions, make general terms more specific, specific terms more general, misunderstand intended meanings, and coin new terms. One goal of this paper, therefore, will be to examine the experience of some related ways to seek semantic interoperability through simplicity: planned languages, interlingua constructs, and pidgins. The problem of semantic interoperability is compounded when we consider Dublin Core in translation. All of the workshops, documents, mailing lists, user guides, and working group outputs of the Dublin Core Initiative have been in English. But in many countries and for many applications, people need a metadata standard in their own language. In principle, the broad elements of Dublin Core can be defined equally well in Bulgarian or Hindi. Since Dublin Core is a controlled standard, however, any parallel definitions need to be kept in sync as the standard evolves. Another goal of the paper, then, will be to define the conceptual and organizational problem of maintaining a metadata standard in multiple languages. In addition to a name and definition, which are meant for human consumption, each Dublin Core element has a label, or indexing token, meant for harvesting by search engines. For practical reasons, these machine-readable tokens are English-looking strings such as Creator and Subject (just as HTML tags are called HEAD, BODY, or TITLE). These tokens, which are shared by Dublin Cores in every language, ensure that metadata fields created in any particular language are indexed together across repositories. As symbols of underlying universal semantics, these tokens form the basis of semantic interoperability among the multiple Dublin Cores. As long as we limit ourselves to sharing these indexing tokens among exact translations of a simple set of fifteen broad elements, the definitions of which fit easily onto two pages, the problem of Dublin Core in multiple languages is straightforward. But nothing having to do with human language is ever so simple. Just as speakers of various languages must learn the language of Dublin Core in their own tongues, we must find the right words to talk about a metadata language that is expressable in many discipline-specific jargons and natural languages and that inevitably will evolve and change over time.

0.027117856 = product of:
  0.08135357 = sum of:
    0.08135357 = weight(_text_:search in 1624) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08135357 = score(doc=1624,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.46558946 = fieldWeight in 1624, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1624)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Discusses a range of professional librarians' opinions on the urgent need either to adopt or replace the current cataloguing rules, a theme closely linked to the identity crisis facing libraries and librarians in the online electronic era. Topics examined include: Gorman and Oddy's views on restructuring AACR principles; the 13 metadata elements contained in the Dublin Core document (1995); catalogue search by known item; keyword search versus subject search; and the US Library of Congress's Program for cooperation cataloging

0.025304725 = product of:
  0.075914174 = sum of:
    0.075914174 = weight(_text_:search in 543) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.075914174 = score(doc=543,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.43445963 = fieldWeight in 543, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=543)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Discusses the development and implementation of models for indexing and searching information resources on the Internet. Examines briefly the results of a simple query on a number of existing search systems and discusses 2 proposed index metadata structures for indexing and supporting search and discovery: The Dublin Core Elements List and the Semantic Header. Presents an indexing and discovery system based on the Semantic Header

0.022141634 = product of:
  0.0664249 = sum of:
    0.0664249 = weight(_text_:search in 6863) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0664249 = score(doc=6863,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.38015217 = fieldWeight in 6863, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6863)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

At present cataloguing of Internet resources are on 2 levels. At level 1, the description of resources is contained in local library catalogues, along with bibliographic surrogates for all other materials that the library access, based on AACR2/MARC systems. At level 2, Internet resources are organized independently of any library agency. These include separate catalogues of selected resources, subject browsing lists and robot-generated search tools, and focus exclusively on Internet resources. A 3rd level needs to be developed - a metacatalogue - whereby a user can identify specific library catalogues to include in a search query of other Internet databases

0.019265227 = product of:
  0.057795677 = sum of:
    0.057795677 = product of:
      0.115591355 = sum of:
        0.115591355 = weight(_text_:22 in 5743) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.115591355 = score(doc=5743,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = 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)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

30. 3.2002 19:45:22

Source

Revista Española de Documentaçion Cientifica. 22(1999) no.2, S.198-219

0.018978544 = product of:
  0.056935627 = sum of:
    0.056935627 = weight(_text_:search in 4053) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.056935627 = score(doc=4053,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.3258447 = fieldWeight in 4053, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4053)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Within a digital library, collections may range from an ad hoc set of objects that serve a temporary purpose to established library collections intended to persist through time. The objects in these collections vary widely, from library and data center holdings to pointers to real-world objects, such as geographic places, and the various metadata schemes that describe them. The key to integrated use of such a variety of collections in a digital library is collection metadata that represents the inherent and contextual characteristics of a collection. The Alexandria Digital Library (ADL) Project has designed and implemented collection metadata for several purposes: in XML form, the collection metadatada 'registers' the collection with the user interface client; in HTML form, it is used for user documentation; eventually, it will be used to describe the collection to network search agents; and it is used for internal collection management, including mapping the object metadata attributes to the common search parameters of the system

0.017893143 = product of:
  0.053679425 = sum of:
    0.053679425 = weight(_text_:search in 2302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.053679425 = score(doc=2302,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.30720934 = fieldWeight in 2302, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2302)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This paper describes emerging metadata practice and standards. It gives an overview of the environments in which metatdata is used, before focusing on metadata for information resources. It outlines an approximate typology of approaches and explores different strands of metadata activity. It discusses trends in format development, metadata management, and use of search and retrieve protocols. It concludes by discussing some features of future deploament of metadata in support of network resource discovery

0.015656501 = product of:
  0.0469695 = sum of:
    0.0469695 = weight(_text_:search in 5096) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0469695 = score(doc=5096,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.2688082 = fieldWeight in 5096, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5096)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Since records are timebvound, and contextual metadata must be understood by an observer whose frame of reference is different from that of the recordkeeper, there is a need for external validation. The processes of terminological control, based on definition, are inadequate for this purpose and what is needed is a process of contextual control, based on observation. Ambience is the context of provenance and it is there that we will find external validation of provenance data. Functions offer one possible tool for crafting ambient relationships. Ambient functions define and give meaning to agents of recordkeeping within the context in which they operate and should be distinguished from business activities and processes which do not afford the basis for meaningful discrimination necessary when formulating appraisal categories and useful search patterns

0.015656501 = product of:
  0.0469695 = sum of:
    0.0469695 = weight(_text_:search in 7395) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0469695 = score(doc=7395,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.2688082 = fieldWeight in 7395, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7395)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

As the number of publications on the WWW grows exponentially there is an urgent need for a standardised system of bibliographic description. In the Netherlands the PICA national union catalogue has created WebCAT to catalogue online publications from universities and research institutes. However, use of WebCAT is restricted to participating institutions. The DutchESS (Dutch Electronic Subject Service) and SURF-ACE Search Enginges projects provide a partial solution to the problems on indexing online publications. The ultimate solution lies in the development of standardised metadata architecture

0.015656501 = product of:
  0.0469695 = sum of:
    0.0469695 = weight(_text_:search in 907) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0469695 = score(doc=907,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.2688082 = fieldWeight in 907, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=907)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The Day was held in Oct 96 to inform about developments in dexcription of electronic documents. Metadata are necessary to aid handling of electronic network resources. A workshop in Dublin Mar 95 compiled 13 elements needed to identify a document-like object, while the Warwick workshop Apr 96 proposed a framework for electronic entries with more metadata types than the Dublin Core. The Nordic Metadata Project aims to evaluate existing metadata format; develop the Dublic Core; make conversion of the Core to the Nordic MARC format possible; and set up a metadata search service for Nordic Internet documents. At the 2nd International Conference on Conceptions of Library and Information Science, Copenhagen Oct 96 a metadata structure for research profiles on Internet homepages was proposed

0.012843484 = product of:
  0.03853045 = sum of:
    0.03853045 = product of:
      0.0770609 = sum of:
        0.0770609 = weight(_text_:22 in 2408) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0770609 = score(doc=2408,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 2408, 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=2408)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

13. 1.2007 18:31:22

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) nos.3/4, S.43-58

0.012652363 = product of:
  0.037957087 = sum of:
    0.037957087 = weight(_text_:search in 1256) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.037957087 = score(doc=1256,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.21722981 = fieldWeight in 1256, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1256)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This article describes an approach for linking geographically distributed collections of metadata so that they are searchable as a single collection. We describe the infrastructure, which uses standard Internet protocols such as the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) and the Common Indexing Protocol (CIP), to distribute queries, return results, and exchange index information. We discuss the advantages of using linked collections of authoritative metadata as an alternative to using a keyword indexing search-engine for resource discovery. We examine other architectures that use metadata for resource discovery, such as Dienst/NCSTRL, the AHDS HTTP/Z39.50 Gateway, and the ROADS initiative. Finally, we discuss research issues and future directions of the project. The Internet Scout Project, which is funded by the National Science Foundation and is located in the Computer Sciences Department at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, is charged with assisting the higher education community in resource discovery on the Internet. To that end, the Scout Report and subsequent subject-specific Scout Reports were developed to guide the U.S. higher education community to research-quality resources. The Scout Report Signpost utilizes the content from the Scout Reports as the basis of a metadata collection. Signpost consists of more than 2000 cataloged Internet sites using established standards such as Library of Congress subject headings and abbreviated call letters, and emerging standards such as the Dublin Core (DC). This searchable and browseable collection is free and freely accessible, as are all of the Internet Scout Project's services.
As well developed as both the Scout Reports and Signpost are, they cannot capture the wealth of high-quality content that is available on the Internet. An obvious next step toward increasing the usefulness of our own collection and its value to our customer base is to partner with other high-quality content providers who have developed similar collections and to develop a single, virtual collection. Project Isaac (working title) is the Internet Scout Project's latest resource discovery effort. Project Isaac involves the development of a research testbed that allows experimentation with protocols and algorithms for creating, maintaining, indexing and searching distributed collections of metadata. Project Isaac's infrastructure uses standard Internet protocols, such as the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) and the Common Indexing Protocol (CIP) to distribute queries, return results, and exchange index or centroid information. The overall goal is to support a single-search interface to geographically distributed and independently maintained metadata collections.