Search (54 results, page 1 of 3)

0.058999788 = product of:
  0.17699936 = sum of:
    0.13487485 = weight(_text_:wide in 2656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13487485 = score(doc=2656,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19679762 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.685348 = fieldWeight in 2656, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2656)
    0.04212451 = product of:
      0.08424902 = sum of:
        0.08424902 = weight(_text_:22 in 2656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08424902 = score(doc=2656,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1555381 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044416238 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 2656, 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=2656)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Date

30.11.1995 20:53:22

0.044626735 = product of:
  0.1338802 = sum of:
    0.09175568 = weight(_text_:computer in 3473) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09175568 = score(doc=3473,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16231956 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.56527805 = fieldWeight in 3473, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3473)
    0.04212451 = product of:
      0.08424902 = sum of:
        0.08424902 = weight(_text_:22 in 3473) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08424902 = score(doc=3473,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1555381 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044416238 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 3473, 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=3473)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Pages

22 S

0.029720977 = product of:
  0.08916293 = sum of:
    0.057803504 = weight(_text_:wide in 4723) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.057803504 = score(doc=4723,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19679762 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.29372054 = fieldWeight in 4723, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4723)
    0.031359423 = weight(_text_:web in 4723) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031359423 = score(doc=4723,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14495286 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 4723, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4723)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

Access of digital materials continues to be an issue of great significance in the development of digital libraries. The proliferation of information in the networked digital environment poses challenges as well as opportunities. The author reports on a wide array of activities in the field. While this publication is not intended to be exhaustive, the reader will find, in a single work, an overview of systems of knowledge organization and pertinent examples of their application to digital materials

Content

(1) Knowledge organization systems: an overview; (2) Linking digital library resources to related resources; (3) Making resources accessible to other communities; (4) Planning and implementing knowledge organization systems in digital libraries; (5) The future of knowledge organization systems on the Web

0.026979826 = product of:
  0.08093948 = sum of:
    0.04816959 = weight(_text_:wide in 906) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04816959 = score(doc=906,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19679762 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.24476713 = fieldWeight in 906, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=906)
    0.03276989 = weight(_text_:computer in 906) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03276989 = score(doc=906,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16231956 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.20188503 = fieldWeight in 906, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=906)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

The need for improved semantic in teroperability between and among vocabularies and knowledge organization schemes is undeniable and growing in importance. There is an ever-increasing need to create an environment by which even multiple portals could be accessed via subject metadata using software that is neutral and available ubiquitously or directly to the user, that could be copied by libraries for use in their own environment. In order to develop or improve a knowledge organization system including emerging options in semantic interoperability, scholars and practitioners need to be able to evaluate a wide variety of projects and stay current with the professional literature. Based on its findings, the Subcommittee concludes that the development of a successful subject semantic interoperability project is a long and difficult process. It requires a substantial investment of financial, human and computer resources. The Subcommittee recommends using the information and tools in this report and its appendices to assist in developing a successful project incorporating subject semantic interoperability. Finally the Subcommittee concludes that since this field of endeavor is still relatively young and immature, it is too early to generate a set of Best Practices that could be used in developing a successful project. We are past the theoretical and basic research phase and into the development phase. Even though there are some successful projects in full production, more projects need to reach maturity and much more research needs to be done.

0.025739124 = product of:
  0.07721737 = sum of:
    0.05005931 = weight(_text_:wide in 1271) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05005931 = score(doc=1271,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.19679762 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.2543695 = fieldWeight in 1271, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1271)
    0.027158061 = weight(_text_:web in 1271) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027158061 = score(doc=1271,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.14495286 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.18735787 = fieldWeight in 1271, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1271)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

The future of bibliographic control will be collaborative, decentralized, international in scope, and Web-based. Its realization will occur in cooperation with the private sector, and with the active collaboration of library users. Data will be gathered from multiple sources; change will happen quickly; and bibliographic control will be dynamic, not static. The underlying technology that makes this future possible and necessary-the World Wide Web-is now almost two decades old. Libraries must continue the transition to this future without delay in order to retain their relevance as information providers. The Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control encourages the library community to take a thoughtful and coordinated approach to effecting significant changes in bibliographic control. Such an approach will call for leadership that is neither unitary nor centralized. Nor will the responsibility to provide such leadership fall solely to the Library of Congress (LC). That said, the Working Group recognizes that LC plays a unique role in the library community of the United States, and the directions that LC takes have great impact on all libraries. We also recognize that there are many other institutions and organizations that have the expertise and the capacity to play significant roles in the bibliographic future. Wherever possible, those institutions must step forward and take responsibility for assisting with navigating the transition and for playing appropriate ongoing roles after that transition is complete. To achieve the goals set out in this document, we must look beyond individual libraries to a system wide deployment of resources. We must realize efficiencies in order to be able to reallocate resources from certain lower-value components of the bibliographic control ecosystem into other higher-value components of that same ecosystem. The recommendations in this report are directed at a number of parties, indicated either by their common initialism (e.g., "LC" for Library of Congress, "PCC" for Program for Cooperative Cataloging) or by their general category (e.g., "Publishers," "National Libraries"). When the recommendation is addressed to "All," it is intended for the library community as a whole and its close collaborators.
The Library of Congress must begin by prioritizing the recommendations that are directed in whole or in part at LC. Some define tasks that can be achieved immediately and with moderate effort; others will require analysis and planning that will have to be coordinated broadly and carefully. The Working Group has consciously not associated time frames with any of its recommendations. The recommendations fall into five general areas: 1. Increase the efficiency of bibliographic production for all libraries through increased cooperation and increased sharing of bibliographic records, and by maximizing the use of data produced throughout the entire "supply chain" for information resources. 2. Transfer effort into higher-value activity. In particular, expand the possibilities for knowledge creation by "exposing" rare and unique materials held by libraries that are currently hidden from view and, thus, underused. 3. Position our technology for the future by recognizing that the World Wide Web is both our technology platform and the appropriate platform for the delivery of our standards. Recognize that people are not the only users of the data we produce in the name of bibliographic control, but so too are machine applications that interact with those data in a variety of ways. 4. Position our community for the future by facilitating the incorporation of evaluative and other user-supplied information into our resource descriptions. Work to realize the potential of the FRBR framework for revealing and capitalizing on the various relationships that exist among information resources. 5. Strengthen the library profession through education and the development of metrics that will inform decision-making now and in the future. The Working Group intends what follows to serve as a broad blueprint for the Library of Congress and its colleagues in the library and information technology communities for extending and promoting access to information resources.

0.02476748 = product of:
  0.07430244 = sum of:
    0.04816959 = weight(_text_:wide in 621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04816959 = score(doc=621,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19679762 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.24476713 = fieldWeight in 621, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=621)
    0.026132854 = weight(_text_:web in 621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026132854 = score(doc=621,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14495286 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 621, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=621)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Content

Der deutsche Markt für Elektronische Informationsdienste im Jahre 2000 - Ergebnisse einer Umsatzerhebung - Von Willi Bredemeier: - Abgesicherte Methodologie unter Berücksichtigung der Spezifika des EIS-Marktes und der aktuellen Entwicklung - teilweise Vergleichbarkeit der Daten ab 1989 - Weitgehende quantitative Markttransparenz, da der Leser die Aggregationen der Markt- und Teilmarktdaten aus einzelwirtschaftlichen Daten voll nachvollziehen kann - 93 zum Teil ausführliche Tabellen vorwiegend zu einzelnen Informationsanbietern unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Geschäftsjahre 2000 und 1999, unterteilt in die Bereiche Gesamtmarkt für Elektronische Informationsdienste, Datev, Realtime-Finanzinformationen, Nachrichtenagenturen, Kreditinformationen, Firmen- und Produktinformationen, weitere Wirtschaftsinformationen, Rechtsinformationen, Wissenschaftlich-technisch-medizinische Informationen - Intellectual Property, Konsumentendienste, Nachbarmärkte - Analyse aktueller Markttrends. Qualität professioneller Firmeninformationen im World Wide Web - Von Mechtild Stock und Wolfgang G. Stock: - Weiterführung der Qualitätsdiskussion und Entwicklung eines Systems von Qualitätskriterien für Informationsangebote, bezogen auf Firmeninformationen im Internet - "Qualitätspanel" für die Bereiche Bonitätsinformationen, Firmenkurzdossiers, Produktinformationen und Adressinformationen mit den Anbietern Bürgel, Creditreform, Dun & Bradstreet Deutschland, ABC online, ALLECO, Hoppenstedt Firmendatenbank, Who is Who in Multimedia, Kompass Deutschland, Sachon Industriedaten, Wer liefert was?, AZ Bertelsmann, Schober.com - Hochdifferenzierte Tests, die den Kunden Hilfen bei der Auswahl zwischen Angeboten und den Anbietern Hinweise auf Maßnahmen zu qualitativen Verbesserungen geben - Detaillierte Informationen über eingesetzte Systeme der Branchen- und Produktklassifikationen - Rankings der Firmeninformationsanbieter insgesamt sowie nach Datenbasen, Retrievalsystemen und Websites, Detailinformationen zu allen Qualitätsdimensionen

0.020800762 = product of:
  0.062402282 = sum of:
    0.04434892 = weight(_text_:web in 3685) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04434892 = score(doc=3685,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14495286 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.3059541 = fieldWeight in 3685, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3685)
    0.01805336 = product of:
      0.03610672 = sum of:
        0.03610672 = weight(_text_:22 in 3685) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03610672 = score(doc=3685,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1555381 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044416238 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3685, 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=3685)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

Presents the findings of the South Ayrshire Libraries OPen Learning and the Internet project, Sep 1997 to Oct 1998. The objective was to demonstrate how open learning materials available on the Internet could be integrated with the provision of local open learning resources to provide an enhanced learning environment in public libraries. The main areas of concentration within the project were information skills support to public library users and the provision of WWW based independent materials to learners. The organisation and retrieval of Web based resources for local use was a major issue throughout the project. Recommends the adoption of Dublin Core metadata standards, the connection of databases of resources with searchable wen pages, and the development of thesauri of terms used to index the Web based resources locally. Sstaff training, and the new skills which will need to be developed, were identified as issues. Cost was also identified as a related issue, extending to issues such as access to open learning material and the Internet

Date

22. 5.1999 18:55:19

0.01932706 = product of:
  0.05798118 = sum of:
    0.020906283 = weight(_text_:web in 5013) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020906283 = score(doc=5013,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14495286 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.14422815 = fieldWeight in 5013, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5013)
    0.037074894 = weight(_text_:computer in 5013) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.037074894 = score(doc=5013,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.16231956 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.22840683 = fieldWeight in 5013, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5013)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

The destabilizing influences of the Web, widespread ownership of personal computers, and rising computer literacy have created an era of discontinuous change in research libraries a time when the cumulated assets of the past do not guarantee future success. The library catalog is such an asset. Today, a large and growing number of students and scholars routinely bypass library catalogs in favor of other discovery tools, and the catalog represents a shrinking proportion of the universe of scholarly information. The catalog is in decline, its processes and structures are unsustainable, and change needs to be swift. At the same time, books and serials are not dead, and they are not yet digital. Notwithstanding widespread expansion of digitization projects, ubiquitous e-journals, and a market that seems poised to move to e-books, the role of catalog records in discovery and retrieval of the world's library collections seems likely to continue for at least a couple of decades and probably longer. This report, commissioned by the Library of Congress (LC), offers an analysis of the current situation, options for revitalizing research library catalogs, a feasibility assessment, a vision for change, and a blueprint for action. Library decision makers are the primary audience for this report, whose aim is to elicit support, dialogue, collaboration, and movement toward solutions. Readers from the business community, particularly those that directly serve libraries, may find the report helpful for defining research and development efforts. The same is true for readers from membership organizations such as OCLC Online Computer Library Center, the Research Libraries Group, the Association for Research Libraries, the Council on Library and Information Resources, the Coalition for Networked Information, and the Digital Library Federation. Library managers and practitioners from all functional groups are likely to take an interest in the interview findings and in specific actions laid out in the blueprint.

0.017477274 = product of:
  0.10486364 = sum of:
    0.10486364 = weight(_text_:computer in 5259) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10486364 = score(doc=5259,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16231956 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.6460321 = fieldWeight in 5259, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5259)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

0.017097663 = product of:
  0.10258597 = sum of:
    0.10258597 = weight(_text_:computer in 812) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10258597 = score(doc=812,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.16231956 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.6320001 = fieldWeight in 812, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=812)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Reports a study of undergraduate students' use of computer-based information retrieval services in relation to their cognitive and learning styles. Includes a survey of staff at Sheffield University, UK on their use of computer databases and the extend to which undergraduates are made aware of these services. Results show that undergraduate use is low and varies greatly between students of differnt faculties. Student searching behaviour was found to be basic and their performance inadequate. Significant correlation's between cognitive and learning styles and search behaviour were found. Computer-assisted learning (CAL) packages were developed and customised for 3 departments. Guidelines were drawn up based on the project's findings for introducing a computerised information sources programme into the undergraduate curriculum and preparing CAL teaching packages on information skills

Theme

Computer Based Training

0.014936171 = product of:
  0.08961702 = sum of:
    0.08961702 = weight(_text_:web in 4782) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08961702 = score(doc=4782,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.14495286 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.6182494 = fieldWeight in 4782, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4782)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

In diesem Dokument sollen Begriffe, Prinzipien und Methoden vorgestellt werden, die sich als hilfreich bei der Erstellung von Semantic Web konformen Repräsentationen von Wissensorganisationssystemen (KOS) erwiesen haben, wie z. B. Thesauri und Klassifikationssysteme. Das Dokument richtet sich an Organisationen wie z. B. Bibliotheken, die ihre traditionellen Wissensorganisationssysteme im Rahmen des Semantic Web veröffentlichen wollen. Die in diesem Dokument beschriebenen Vorgehensweisen und Prinzipien sind nicht als normativ anzusehen. Sie sollen nur dabei helfen, von bisher gemachten Erfahrungen zu profitieren und einen leichteren Einstieg in die wichtigsten Begriffichkeiten und Techniken des Semantic Web zu bekommen. An vielen Stellen wird zudem auf weiterführende Literatur zum Thema und auf relevante Standards und Spezifikationen aus dem Bereich des Semantic Web hingewiesen.

Theme

Semantic Web

0.012319146 = product of:
  0.07391487 = sum of:
    0.07391487 = weight(_text_:web in 51) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07391487 = score(doc=51,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.14495286 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.5099235 = fieldWeight in 51, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=51)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

The increasingly pervasive nature of the Web, expanding to devices and things in everydaylife, along with new trends in Artificial Intelligence call for new paradigms and a new look onKnowledge Representation and Processing at scale for the Semantic Web. The emerging, but stillto be concretely shaped concept of "Knowledge Graphs" provides an excellent unifying metaphorfor this current status of Semantic Web research. More than two decades of Semantic Webresearch provides a solid basis and a promising technology and standards stack to interlink data,ontologies and knowledge on the Web. However, neither are applications for Knowledge Graphsas such limited to Linked Open Data, nor are instantiations of Knowledge Graphs in enterprises- while often inspired by - limited to the core Semantic Web stack. This report documents theprogram and the outcomes of Dagstuhl Seminar 18371 "Knowledge Graphs: New Directions forKnowledge Representation on the Semantic Web", where a group of experts from academia andindustry discussed fundamental questions around these topics for a week in early September 2018,including the following: what are knowledge graphs? Which applications do we see to emerge?Which open research questions still need be addressed and which technology gaps still need tobe closed?

Theme

Semantic Web

0.0112395715 = product of:
  0.067437425 = sum of:
    0.067437425 = weight(_text_:wide in 5179) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.067437425 = score(doc=5179,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19679762 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.342674 = fieldWeight in 5179, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5179)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Issue

Revised after world-wide review. Endorsed by the IFLA Professional Committe.

0.010994123 = product of:
  0.065964736 = sum of:
    0.065964736 = product of:
      0.13192947 = sum of:
        0.13192947 = weight(_text_:programs in 5016) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13192947 = score(doc=5016,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25748047 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.79699 = idf(docFreq=364, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044416238 = queryNorm
            0.5123863 = fieldWeight in 5016, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.79699 = idf(docFreq=364, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5016)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

The charge for the SAC Subcommittee on Metadata and Subject Analysis states: Identify and study the major issues surrounding the use of metadata in the subject analysis and classification of digital resources. Provide discussion forums and programs relevant to these issues. Discussion forums should begin by Annual 1998. The continued need for the subcommittee should be reexamined by SAC no later than 2001.

0.010923296 = product of:
  0.06553978 = sum of:
    0.06553978 = weight(_text_:computer in 3472) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06553978 = score(doc=3472,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16231956 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.40377006 = fieldWeight in 3472, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3472)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Series

Research report. Online Computer Library Center; OCLC/OPR/RR-86/1

0.010923296 = product of:
  0.06553978 = sum of:
    0.06553978 = weight(_text_:computer in 5937) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06553978 = score(doc=5937,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16231956 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.40377006 = fieldWeight in 5937, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5937)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

The guidelines are a response to 2 interconnected problems: little bibliographic control exists for electronic texts, and the AACR2 standards for control of computer files are not entirely satisfactory

0.010813512 = product of:
  0.06488107 = sum of:
    0.06488107 = weight(_text_:computer in 1239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06488107 = score(doc=1239,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.16231956 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.39971197 = fieldWeight in 1239, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1239)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Klassifikationen haben i.a. bei jeder Systemstelle eine Notation, die den Platz im System festlegt und als Kurzbezeichnung dient. Dokumentationssprachen verwenden häufig einen hierarchisch strukturierten Thesaurus, bei dem ebenfalls Notationen eingesetzt werden können. Beim Entwurf von Notationen sollten computer-interne und computer-externe Aspekte berücksichtigt werden. Es wird systematisch dargestellt, welche grundsätzlichen Typen von Notationssysstemen entworfen werden können, u.a. auch die vom Verfasser entwickelten durchgehenden oder sequentiellen Notationen mit Ebenenindikator. Linksbündige sequentielle Notationssysteme sind besonders flexibel, d.h. Einfügungen und andere Veränderungen sind leicht möglich. Die Bewertung von Notationssystemen, an einem Beispiel durchgeführt, geschieht an Hand eines möglichst umfassenden Anforderungskatalogs. Für Entwurfsentscheidungen werden die Methoden der Nutzwertanalyse empfohlen, insbesondere auch bei der Frage, ob Notationen überhaupt eingesetzt werden sollen. Eine weitere Möglichkeit ist, daß Notationen nur auf bestimmten hierarchischen Ebenen verwendet werden

0.010561468 = product of:
  0.063368805 = sum of:
    0.063368805 = weight(_text_:web in 59) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.063368805 = score(doc=59,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.14495286 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.43716836 = fieldWeight in 59, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=59)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Many Semantic Web applications provide access to their resources through text-based search queries, using explicit semantics to improve the search results. This paper provides an analysis of the current state of the art in semantic search, based on 35 existing systems. We identify different types of semantic search features that are used during query construction, the core search process, the presentation of the search results and user feedback on query and results. For each of these, we consider the functionality that the system provides and how this is made available through the user interface.

Theme

Semantic Web

0.009641257 = product of:
  0.05784754 = sum of:
    0.05784754 = weight(_text_:web in 318) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05784754 = score(doc=318,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.14495286 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.39907828 = fieldWeight in 318, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=318)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Seit Bestehen der Menschheit sammelt der Mensch Informationen, seit Bestehen des Internets stellt der Mensch Informationen ins Web, seit Bestehen des Semantic Webs sollen auch Maschinen in die Lage versetzt werden mit diesen Informationen umzugehen. Das Bibliothekswesen ist einer der Sammler. Seit Jahrhunderten werden Kataloge und Bibliografien sowie Inventarnachweise geführt. Mit der Aufgabe des Zettelkatalogs hin zum Onlinekatalog wurde es Benutzern plötzlich möglich in Beständen komfortabel zu suchen. Durch die Bereitstellung von Daten aus dem Bibliothekswesen im Semantic Web sollen nicht nur die eigenen Katalogsysteme Zugriff auf diese Informationen erhalten, sondern jede beliebige Anwendung, die auf das Web zugreifen kann. Darüber hinaus ist die Vorstellung, dass sich die im Web befindenden Daten - in sofern möglich - miteinander verlinken und zu einem gigantischen semantischen Netz werden, das als ein großer Datenpool verwendet werden kann. Die Voraussetzung hierfür ist wie beim Übergang zum Onlinekatalog die Aufbereitung der Daten in einem passenden Format. Normdaten dienen im Bibliothekswesen bereits dazu eine Vernetzung der unterschiedlichen Bestände zu erlauben. Bei der Erschließung eines Buches wird nicht bloß gesagt, dass jemand, der Thomas Mann heißt, der Autor ist - es wird eine Verknüpfung vom Katalogisat zu dem Thomas Mann erzeugt, der am 6. Juni 1875 in Lübeck geboren und am 12. August 1955 in Zürich verstorben ist. Der Vorteil von Normdateneintragungen ist, dass sie zum eindeutigen Nachweis der Verfasserschaft oder Mitwirkung an einem Werk beitragen. Auch stehen Normdateneintragungen bereits allen Bibliotheken für die Nachnutzung bereit - der Schritt ins Semantic Web wäre somit die Öffnung der Normdaten für alle denkbaren Nutzergruppen.
Die Gemeinsame Normdatei (GND) ist seit April 2012 die Datei, die die im deutschsprachigen Bibliothekswesen verwendeten Normdaten enthält. Folglich muss auf Basis dieser Daten eine Repräsentation für die Darstellung als Linked Data im Semantic Web etabliert werden. Neben der eigentlichen Bereitstellung von GND-Daten im Semantic Web sollen die Daten mit bereits als Linked Data vorhandenen Datenbeständen (DBpedia, VIAF etc.) verknüpft und nach Möglichkeit kompatibel sein, wodurch die GND einem internationalen und spartenübergreifenden Publikum zugänglich gemacht wird. Dieses Dokument dient vor allem zur Beschreibung, wie die GND-Linked-Data-Repräsentation entstand und dem Weg zur Spezifikation einer eignen Ontologie. Hierfür werden nach einer kurzen Einführung in die GND die Grundprinzipien und wichtigsten Standards für die Veröffentlichung von Linked Data im Semantic Web vorgestellt, um darauf aufbauend existierende Vokabulare und Ontologien des Bibliothekswesens betrachten zu können. Anschließend folgt ein Exkurs in das generelle Vorgehen für die Bereitstellung von Linked Data, wobei die so oft zitierte Open World Assumption kritisch hinterfragt und damit verbundene Probleme insbesondere in Hinsicht Interoperabilität und Nachnutzbarkeit aufgedeckt werden. Um Probleme der Interoperabilität zu vermeiden, wird den Empfehlungen der Library Linked Data Incubator Group [LLD11] gefolgt.
Im Kapitel Anwendungsprofile als Basis für die Ontologieentwicklung wird die Spezifikation von Dublin Core Anwendungsprofilen kritisch betrachtet, um auszumachen wann und in welcher Form sich ihre Verwendung bei dem Vorhaben Bereitstellung von Linked Data anbietet. In den nachfolgenden Abschnitten wird die GND-Ontologie, welche als Standard für die Serialisierung von GND-Daten im Semantic Web dient, samt Modellierungsentscheidungen näher vorgestellt. Dabei wird insbesondere der Technik des Vocabulary Alignment eine prominente Position eingeräumt, da darin ein entscheidender Mechanismus zur Steigerung der Interoperabilität und Nachnutzbarkeit gesehen wird. Auch wird sich mit der Verlinkung zu externen Datensets intensiv beschäftigt. Hierfür wurden ausgewählte Datenbestände hinsichtlich ihrer Qualität und Aktualität untersucht und Empfehlungen für die Implementierung innerhalb des GND-Datenbestandes gegeben. Abschließend werden eine Zusammenfassung und ein Ausblick auf weitere Schritte gegeben.

0.009052687 = product of:
  0.054316122 = sum of:
    0.054316122 = weight(_text_:web in 4322) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.054316122 = score(doc=4322,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.14495286 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.37471575 = fieldWeight in 4322, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4322)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Dieses Whitepaper befasst sich mit der Integration semantischer Technologien in bestehende Ansätze des Information Retrieval und die damit verbundenen weitreichenden Auswirkungen auf Effizienz und Effektivität von Suche und Navigation in Dokumenten. Nach einer Einbettung in die Problematik des Wissensmanagement aus Sicht der Informationstechnik folgt ein Überblick zu den Methoden des Information Retrieval. Anschließend werden die semantischen Technologien "Wissen modellieren - Ontologie" und "Neues Wissen ableiten - Inferenz" vorgestellt. Ein Integrationsansatz wird im Folgenden diskutiert und die entstehenden Mehrwerte präsentiert. Insbesondere ergeben sich Erweiterungen hinsichtlich einer verfeinerten Suchunterstützung und einer kontextbezogenen Navigation sowie die Möglichkeiten der Auswertung von regelbasierten Zusammenhängen und einfache Integration von strukturierten Informationsquellen. Das Whitepaper schließt mit einem Ausblick auf die zukünftige Entwicklung des WWW hin zu einem Semantic Web und die damit verbundenen Implikationen für semantische Technologien.

Series

Ontoprise "Semantics for the Web" - Whitepaper series

Theme

Semantic Web