Search (189 results, page 1 of 10)

0.14154318 = product of:
  0.28308636 = sum of:
    0.19869895 = weight(_text_:markup in 2606) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.19869895 = score(doc=2606,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.27638784 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042049456 = queryNorm
        0.7189135 = fieldWeight in 2606, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2606)
    0.08438742 = product of:
      0.12658113 = sum of:
        0.08670129 = weight(_text_:language in 2606) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08670129 = score(doc=2606,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.16497234 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9232929 = idf(docFreq=2376, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042049456 = queryNorm
            0.5255505 = fieldWeight in 2606, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.9232929 = idf(docFreq=2376, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2606)
        0.039879844 = weight(_text_:22 in 2606) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039879844 = score(doc=2606,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14725003 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042049456 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2606, 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=2606)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Catalogers have become fluent in information technology such as web design skills, HyperText Markup Language (HTML), Cascading Stylesheets (CSS), eXensible Markup Language (XML), and programming languages. The knowledge gained from learning information technology can be used to experiment with methods of transforming one metadata schema into another using various software solutions. This paper will discuss the use of eXtensible Stylesheet Language Transformations (XSLT) for repurposing, editing, and reformatting metadata. Catalogers have the requisite skills for working with any metadata schema, and if they are excluded from metadata work, libraries are wasting a valuable human resource.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.13623986 = product of:
  0.2724797 = sum of:
    0.19869895 = weight(_text_:markup in 3597) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.19869895 = score(doc=3597,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.27638784 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042049456 = queryNorm
        0.7189135 = fieldWeight in 3597, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3597)
    0.07378077 = product of:
      0.11067115 = sum of:
        0.070791304 = weight(_text_:language in 3597) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.070791304 = score(doc=3597,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16497234 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9232929 = idf(docFreq=2376, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042049456 = queryNorm
            0.42911017 = fieldWeight in 3597, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.9232929 = idf(docFreq=2376, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3597)
        0.039879844 = weight(_text_:22 in 3597) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039879844 = score(doc=3597,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14725003 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042049456 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3597, 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=3597)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

To improve searching, filtering and processing of information on the Web, a common effort is made in the direction of metadata, defined as machine understandable information about Web resources or other things. In particular, the eXtensible Markup Language (XML) aims at providing a common syntax to emerging metadata formats. Proposes the Structured Graph Format (SGF) an XML compliant markup language based on structured graphs, for capturing Web sites' structure. Presents SGMapper, a client-site tool, which aims to facilitate navigation in large Web sites by generating highly interactive site maps using SGF metadata

Date

1. 8.1996 22:08:06

0.13473175 = product of:
  0.2694635 = sum of:
    0.2408595 = weight(_text_:markup in 5762) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2408595 = score(doc=5762,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.27638784 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042049456 = queryNorm
        0.8714547 = fieldWeight in 5762, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5762)
    0.028604005 = product of:
      0.08581201 = sum of:
        0.08581201 = weight(_text_:language in 5762) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08581201 = score(doc=5762,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16497234 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9232929 = idf(docFreq=2376, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042049456 = queryNorm
            0.52016 = fieldWeight in 5762, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9232929 = idf(docFreq=2376, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5762)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

0.1270263 = product of:
  0.2540526 = sum of:
    0.2270845 = weight(_text_:markup in 1835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2270845 = score(doc=1835,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.27638784 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042049456 = queryNorm
        0.8216154 = fieldWeight in 1835, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1835)
    0.026968118 = product of:
      0.08090435 = sum of:
        0.08090435 = weight(_text_:language in 1835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08090435 = score(doc=1835,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16497234 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9232929 = idf(docFreq=2376, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042049456 = queryNorm
            0.4904116 = fieldWeight in 1835, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.9232929 = idf(docFreq=2376, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1835)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Discusses the range of applications of the XML meta language, which allows users to design their own markup language and share it with others. Instead of being confined to HTML, where 'one size fits all', industries, academic disciplines and professional organizations can use XML syntax to create a common set of tags which standardize the presentation of information. The linking abilities of XML are more powerful than HTML, so that it will support bidirectional and multiway links, as well as those to a span of text rather than to a single point

0.11227646 = product of:
  0.22455291 = sum of:
    0.20071624 = weight(_text_:markup in 3829) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.20071624 = score(doc=3829,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.27638784 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042049456 = queryNorm
        0.72621226 = fieldWeight in 3829, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3829)
    0.023836672 = product of:
      0.07151002 = sum of:
        0.07151002 = weight(_text_:language in 3829) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07151002 = score(doc=3829,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16497234 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9232929 = idf(docFreq=2376, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042049456 = queryNorm
            0.4334667 = fieldWeight in 3829, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9232929 = idf(docFreq=2376, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3829)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

0.100229636 = product of:
  0.20045927 = sum of:
    0.14050137 = weight(_text_:markup in 57) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14050137 = score(doc=57,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.27638784 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042049456 = queryNorm
        0.5083486 = fieldWeight in 57, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=57)
    0.059957903 = product of:
      0.08993685 = sum of:
        0.05005701 = weight(_text_:language in 57) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05005701 = score(doc=57,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16497234 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9232929 = idf(docFreq=2376, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042049456 = queryNorm
            0.30342668 = fieldWeight in 57, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9232929 = idf(docFreq=2376, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=57)
        0.039879844 = weight(_text_:22 in 57) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039879844 = score(doc=57,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14725003 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042049456 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 57, 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=57)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Conceptual Knowledge Markup Language (CKML), an application of XML, is a new standard being promoted for the specification of online conceptual knowledge (Kent and Shrivastava, 1998). CKML follows the philosophy of Conceptual Knowledge Processing (Wille, 1982), a principled approach to knowledge representation and data analysis, which advocates the development of methodologies and techniques to support people in their rational thinking, judgement and actions. CKML was developed and is being used in the WAVE networked information discovery and retrieval system (Kent and Neuss, 1994) as a standard for the specification of conceptual knowledge

Date

30.12.2001 16:22:41

0.07939145 = product of:
  0.1587829 = sum of:
    0.14192782 = weight(_text_:markup in 2093) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14192782 = score(doc=2093,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.27638784 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042049456 = queryNorm
        0.51350963 = fieldWeight in 2093, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2093)
    0.016855072 = product of:
      0.050565217 = sum of:
        0.050565217 = weight(_text_:language in 2093) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.050565217 = score(doc=2093,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16497234 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9232929 = idf(docFreq=2376, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042049456 = queryNorm
            0.30650726 = fieldWeight in 2093, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.9232929 = idf(docFreq=2376, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2093)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

This paper deals with the problem of modeling Web information resources using expert knowledge and personalized user information for improved Web searching capabilities. We propose a "Web information space" model, which is composed of Web-based information resources (HTML/XML [Hypertext Markup Language/Extensible Markup Language] documents an the Web), expert advice repositories (domain-expert-specified metadata for information resources), and personalized information about users (captured as user profiles that indicate users' preferences about experts as well as users' knowledge about topics). Expert advice, the heart of the Web information space model, is specified using topics and relationships among topics (called metalinks), along the lines of the recently proposed topic maps. Topics and metalinks constitute metadata that describe the contents of the underlying HTML/XML Web resources. The metadata specification process is semiautomated, and it exploits XML DTDs (Document Type Definition) to allow domain-expert guided mapping of DTD elements to topics and metalinks. The expert advice is stored in an object-relational database management system (DBMS). To demonstrate the practicality and usability of the proposed Web information space model, we created a prototype expert advice repository of more than one million topics/metalinks for DBLP (Database and Logic Programming) Bibliography data set. We also present a query interface that provides sophisticated querying fa cilities for DBLP Bibliography resources using the expert advice repository.

0.07695766 = product of:
  0.15391532 = sum of:
    0.14050137 = weight(_text_:markup in 5726) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14050137 = score(doc=5726,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.27638784 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042049456 = queryNorm
        0.5083486 = fieldWeight in 5726, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5726)
    0.013413949 = product of:
      0.040241845 = sum of:
        0.040241845 = weight(_text_:29 in 5726) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040241845 = score(doc=5726,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14791684 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042049456 = queryNorm
            0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 5726, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5726)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

This chapter uses a distinction common in literary studies to distinguish between metadata applications for discovery and metadata applications for use. The author argues that metadata systems for resource discovery, such as the Dublin Core, are continuous with the traditions of bibliographic description, and rely on a principle of metonymy: the use of a surrogate or adjunct object to represent another. Metadata systems for resource use, such as semantic markup languages, are continuous with the traditions of database design, and rely on a principle of metaphor: the use of a paradigmatic image or design which conditions how the user will respond to and interact with the data.

Date

29. 9.2008 19:10:34

0.07374786 = product of:
  0.29499143 = sum of:
    0.29499143 = weight(_text_:markup in 4437) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.29499143 = score(doc=4437,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.27638784 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042049456 = queryNorm
        1.0673097 = fieldWeight in 4437, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, 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.

0.05613823 = product of:
  0.11227646 = sum of:
    0.10035812 = weight(_text_:markup in 3777) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10035812 = score(doc=3777,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.27638784 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042049456 = queryNorm
        0.36310613 = fieldWeight in 3777, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3777)
    0.011918336 = product of:
      0.03575501 = sum of:
        0.03575501 = weight(_text_:language in 3777) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03575501 = score(doc=3777,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16497234 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9232929 = idf(docFreq=2376, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042049456 = queryNorm
            0.21673335 = fieldWeight in 3777, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9232929 = idf(docFreq=2376, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3777)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Encoded Archival Description (EAD) is an international digital standard based on Extensible Markup Language (XML) for encoding descriptions of archival records. People living their lives as individuals, as members of families, and as members of corporate bodies create and assemble records that serve as instruments for carrying out or documenting the performance of activities. Based on the archival principles of respect des fonds (or provenance) and original order, archivists traditionally have treated all of the records created and assembled by one individual, family, or corporate body as a collection or fonds. Archivists describe records as an essential part of their responsibility for preserving and facilitating access to and use of archives. Archival description provides information essential for establishing the authenticity and completeness of fonds, and serves effective administration, discovery, access, and understanding of records. Traditionally archivists have described each fonds hierarchically in a single apparatus commonly called a finding aid. Until the advent of computing, finding aids were typically in printed form. In the 1990s, archivists created EAD, an encoding standard for archival description. EAD is based technologically on XML and intellectually on General International Standard Archival Description (ISAD(G)), a descriptive framework developed by the International Council of Archives (ICA). As with all standards, EAD will continue to develop in the future. Future changes to EAD will be influenced by ICA descriptive standards that complement ISAD(G) and encoding standards based on them that will complement EAD. This entry is organized into six sections: introduction, archival records, archival description, EAD, history, and future.

0.045969315 = product of:
  0.09193863 = sum of:
    0.060214873 = weight(_text_:markup in 732) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.060214873 = score(doc=732,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.27638784 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042049456 = queryNorm
        0.21786368 = fieldWeight in 732, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=732)
    0.03172376 = product of:
      0.047585636 = sum of:
        0.03033913 = weight(_text_:language in 732) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03033913 = score(doc=732,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16497234 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9232929 = idf(docFreq=2376, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042049456 = queryNorm
            0.18390435 = fieldWeight in 732, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.9232929 = idf(docFreq=2376, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=732)
        0.017246505 = weight(_text_:29 in 732) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017246505 = score(doc=732,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14791684 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042049456 = queryNorm
            0.11659596 = fieldWeight in 732, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=732)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Metadata in the Digital Library is a complete guide to building a digital library metadata strategy from scratch, using established metadata standards bound together by the markup language XML. The book introduces the reader to the theory of metadata and shows how it can be applied in practice. It lays out the basic principles that should underlie any metadata strategy, including its relation to such fundamentals as the digital curation lifecycle, and demonstrates how they should be put into effect. It introduces the XML language and the key standards for each type of metadata, including Dublin Core and MODS for descriptive metadata and PREMIS for its administrative and preservation counterpart. Finally, the book shows how these can all be integrated using the packaging standard METS. Two case studies from the Warburg Institute in London show how the strategy can be implemented in a working environment. The strategy laid out in this book will ensure that a digital library's metadata will support all of its operations, be fully interoperable with others and enable its long-term preservation. It assumes no prior knowledge of metadata, XML or any of the standards that it covers. It provides both an introduction to best practices in digital library metadata and a manual for their practical implementation.

Date

29. 9.2022 17:57:57

0.040143248 = product of:
  0.16057299 = sum of:
    0.16057299 = weight(_text_:markup in 1425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16057299 = score(doc=1425,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.27638784 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042049456 = queryNorm
        0.5809698 = fieldWeight in 1425, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1425)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.039296757 = product of:
  0.078593515 = sum of:
    0.07025068 = weight(_text_:markup in 1210) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07025068 = score(doc=1210,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.27638784 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042049456 = queryNorm
        0.2541743 = fieldWeight in 1210, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1210)
    0.008342835 = product of:
      0.025028504 = sum of:
        0.025028504 = weight(_text_:language in 1210) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025028504 = score(doc=1210,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16497234 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9232929 = idf(docFreq=2376, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042049456 = queryNorm
            0.15171334 = fieldWeight in 1210, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9232929 = idf(docFreq=2376, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1210)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

* Agencies maintaining directories of data elements in a domain area in accordance with ISO/IEC 11179 (This standard specifies good practice for data element definition as well as the registration process. Example implementations are the National Health Information Knowledgebase hosted by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare and the Environmental Data Registry hosted by the US Environmental Protection Agency.); * The xml.org directory of the Extended Markup Language (XML) document specifications facilitating re-use of Document Type Definition (DTD), hosted by the Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards (OASIS); * The MetaForm database of Dublin Core usage and mappings maintained at the State and University Library in Goettingen; * The Semantic Web Agreement Group Dictionary, a database of terms for the Semantic Web that can be referred to by humans and software agents; * LEXML, a multi-lingual and multi-jurisdictional RDF Dictionary for the legal world; * The SCHEMAS registry maintained by the European Commission funded SCHEMAS project, which indexes several metadata element sets as well as a large number of activity reports describing metadata related activities and initiatives. Metadata registries essentially provide an index of terms. Given the distributed nature of the Web, there are a number of ways this can be accomplished. For example, the registry could link to terms and definitions in schemas published by implementers and stored locally by the schema maintainer. Alternatively, the registry might harvest various metadata schemas from their maintainers. Registries provide 'added value' to users by indexing schemas relevant to a particular 'domain' or 'community of use' and by simplifying the navigation of terms by enabling multiple schemas to be accessed from one view. An important benefit of this approach is an increase in the reuse of existing terms, rather than users having to reinvent them. Merging schemas to one view leads to harmonization between applications and helps avoid duplication of effort. Additionally, the establishment of registries to index terms actively being used in local implementations facilitates the metadata standards activity by providing implementation experience transferable to the standards-making process.

0.038893707 = product of:
  0.077787414 = sum of:
    0.06953015 = weight(_text_:markup in 339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06953015 = score(doc=339,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.27638784 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042049456 = queryNorm
        0.25156733 = fieldWeight in 339, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=339)
    0.008257266 = product of:
      0.024771798 = sum of:
        0.024771798 = weight(_text_:language in 339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024771798 = score(doc=339,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.16497234 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9232929 = idf(docFreq=2376, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042049456 = queryNorm
            0.15015729 = fieldWeight in 339, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.9232929 = idf(docFreq=2376, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=339)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST. 58(2007) no.6., S.909-910 (A.D. Petrou): "A division in metadata definitions for physical objects vs. those for digital resources offered in Chapter 1 is punctuated by the use of broader, more inclusive metadata definitions, such as data about data as well as with the inclusion of more specific metadata definitions intended for networked resources. Intertwined with the book's subject matter, which is to "distinguish traditional cataloguing from metadata activity" (5), the authors' chosen metadata definition is also detailed on page 5 as follows: Thus while granting the validity of the inclusive definition, we concentrate primarily on metadata as it is most commonly thought of both inside and outside of the library community, as "structured information used to find, access, use and manage information resources primarily in a digital environment." (International Encyclopedia of Information and Library Science, 2003) Metadata principles discussed by the authors include modularity, extensibility, refinement and multilingualism. The latter set is followed by seven misconceptions about metadata. Two types of metadata discussed are automatically generated indexes and manually created records. In terms of categories of metadata, the authors present three sets of them as follows: descriptive, structural, and administrative metadata. Chapter 2 focuses on metadata for communities of practice, and is a prelude to content in Chapter 3 where metadata applications, use, and development are presented from the perspective of libraries. Chapter 2 discusses the emergence and impact of metadata on organization and access of online resources from the perspective of communities for which such standards exist and for the need for mapping one standard to another. Discussion focuses on metalanguages, such as Standard Generalized Markup Language (SGML) and eXtensible Markup Language (XML), "capable of embedding descriptive elements within the document markup itself' (25). This discussion falls under syntactic interoperability. For semantic interoperability, HTML and other mark-up languages, such as Text Encoding Initiative (TEI) and Computer Interchange of Museum Information (CIMI), are covered. For structural interoperability, Dublin Core's 15 metadata elements are grouped into three areas: content (title, subject, description, type, source, relation, and coverage), intellectual property (creator, publisher, contributor and rights), and instantiation (date, format, identifier, and language) for discussion.

0.03512534 = product of:
  0.14050137 = sum of:
    0.14050137 = weight(_text_:markup in 702) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14050137 = score(doc=702,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.27638784 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042049456 = queryNorm
        0.5083486 = fieldWeight in 702, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=702)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Information professions identified the need for a set of standard metadata almost as soon as the WWW became a reality. Several initiatives have already identified the types of bibliographic information that would be necessary to describe and locate an electronic publication. The descriptors identified in the OCLC/NCSA Dublin Core are combined with those assembled by the Coalition of Networked Information and the Internet Engineering Task force to produce a list of electronic citation elements. Advocates embedding these citation elements within electrinic documents through the use of HTML<META>tags and other markup techniques. There is also a call to cataloguing librarians to contribute their expertise in information resources management to document being prepared for the WWW in order to influence the quality of electronic publication from the insides

0.03512534 = product of:
  0.14050137 = sum of:
    0.14050137 = weight(_text_:markup in 5509) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14050137 = score(doc=5509,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.27638784 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042049456 = queryNorm
        0.5083486 = fieldWeight in 5509, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5509)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Discusses the development and implications of electronic resource description systems, including the familiar library standard, the MARC Format, and the newly developing Resource Description Format (RDF), as well as other non-library markup languages such as XML, HTML, SGML, etc. Explains the differences between content and container, and the kinds of rules needed for describing each. Closes by outlining clearly why it is important for librarians to reach out beyond the library community and participate in the development of metadata standards.

0.028069114 = product of:
  0.05613823 = sum of:
    0.05017906 = weight(_text_:markup in 133) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05017906 = score(doc=133,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.27638784 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042049456 = queryNorm
        0.18155307 = fieldWeight in 133, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.572923 = idf(docFreq=167, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=133)
    0.005959168 = product of:
      0.017877504 = sum of:
        0.017877504 = weight(_text_:language in 133) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017877504 = score(doc=133,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16497234 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9232929 = idf(docFreq=2376, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042049456 = queryNorm
            0.108366676 = fieldWeight in 133, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9232929 = idf(docFreq=2376, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=133)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Footnote

Rez. in: KO 33(2006) no.1, S.58-60 (S.J. Miller): "Metadata: A Cataloger's Primer is a welcome addition to the field of introductory books about metadata intended for librarians and students. The book consists of a collection of papers co-published simultaneously as Cataloging and Classification Quarterly, Volume 40, Numbers 3/4 2005. In the Introduction, the book's editor, Richard P Smiraglia, states that "The purpose of this volume is to provide a learning resource about metadata for catalog librarians and students ... The point of the volume, overall, is that in library and information science there is an ongoing convergence of cataloging and metadata, such that the community will benefit from instructional material that demonstrates this convergence" (p. 1). The collection is divided into two major sections. Part I, "Intellectual Foundations," includes papers with an introductory and theoretical focus, while Part II, "How to Create, Apply, and Use Metadata," contains material with a relatively more practical, instructive focus. In "Understanding Metadata and Metadata Schemes," Jane Greenberg defines metadata and its functions and provides a useful framework for analyzing and comparing diverse metadata schemes based on their objectives and principles, domains, and architectural layout. In her paper "Metadata and Bibliographic Control: Soul-mates or Two Solitudes?" Lynne Howarth directly addresses the central theme of this collection by examining the historical development of, and growing convergence between, the two fields, and concludes that they are more soulmates than solitudes. In "Metadata, Metaphor, and Metonymy," D. Grant Campbell outlines the development of metadata among different stakeholder communities and employs structuralist literary theory to illuminate a perspective on metadata and information representation as special uses of human language in the form of metaphor and metonymy. Part I continues with three papers that present the results of original applied research. Leatrice Ferraioli explores the ways in which individual workers use their own personal metadata for organizing documents in the workplace in "An Exploratory Study of Metadata Creation in a Health Care Agency." In her paper "The Defining Element-A Discussion of the Creator Element within Metadata Schemas," Jennifer Cwiok analyses divergent uses of the "Creator" or equivalent elements in seven different metadata schemes and compares those with the AACR2 approach to representing authorship and intellectual responsibility. The relevance of the bibliographic concept of "the work" to metadata creation for museum artifacts is the focus of "Content Metadata-An Analysis of Etruscan Artifacts in a Museum of Archeology" by Richard P Smiraglia.
Part II consists of five papers on specific metadata standards and applications. Anita Coleman presents an element-by-element description of how to create Dublin Core metadata for Web resources to be included in a library catalog, using principles inspired by cataloging practice, in her paper "From Cataloging to Metadata: Dublin Core Records for the Library Catalog." The next three papers provide especially excellent introductory overviews of three diverse types of metadata-related standards: "Metadata Standards for Archival Control: An Introduction to EAD and EAC" by Alexander C. Thurman, "Introduction to XML" by Patrick Yott, and "METS: the Metadata Encoding and Transmission Standard" by Linda Cantara. Finally, Michael Chopey offers a superb and most useful overview of "Planning and Implementing a Metadata-Driven Digital Repository." Although all of the articles in this book contain interesting, often illuminating, and potentially useful information, not all serve equally well as introductory material for working catalogers not already familiar with metadata. It would be difficult to consider this volume, taken as a whole, as truly a "primer" for catalog librarians, as the subtitle implies. The content of the articles is too much a mix of introductory essays and original research, some of it at a relatively more advanced level. The collection does not approach the topic in the kind of coherent, systematic, or comprehensive way that would be necessary for a true "primer" or introductory textbook. While several of the papers would be quite appropriate for a primer, such a text would need to include, among other things, coverage of other metadata schemes and protocols such as TEI, VRA, and OAI, which are missing here. That having been said, however, Dr. Smiraglia's excellent introduction to the volume itself serves as a kind of concise, well-written "mini-primer" for catalogers new to metadata. It succinctly covers definitions of metadata, basic concepts, content designation and markup languages, metadata for resource description, including short overviews of TEI, DC, EAD, and AACR2/MARC21, and introduces the papers included in the book. In the conclusion to this essay, Dr. Smiraglia says about the book: "In the end the contents go beyond the definition of primer as `introductory textbook.' But the authors have collectively compiled a thought-provoking volume about the uses of metadata" (p. 15). This is a fair assessment of the work taken as a whole. In this reviewer's opinion, there is to date no single introductory textbook on metadata that is fully satisfactory for both working catalogers and for library and information science (LIS) students who may or may not have had exposure to cataloging. But there are a handful of excellent books that serve different aspects of that function. These include the following recent publications:

0.018445192 = product of:
  0.07378077 = sum of:
    0.07378077 = product of:
      0.11067115 = sum of:
        0.070791304 = weight(_text_:language in 5165) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.070791304 = score(doc=5165,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16497234 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9232929 = idf(docFreq=2376, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042049456 = queryNorm
            0.42911017 = fieldWeight in 5165, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.9232929 = idf(docFreq=2376, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5165)
        0.039879844 = weight(_text_:22 in 5165) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039879844 = score(doc=5165,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14725003 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042049456 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5165, 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=5165)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

States that heterogeneous project groups today may be expected to use the mechanisms of the Web for sharing information. Metadata has been proposed as a mechanism for expressing the semantics of information and, hence, facilitate information retrieval, understanding and use. Presents an approach to sharing information which aims to use a semantic modeling language as the basis for expressing the semantics of information and designing metadata schemes. Functioning on the borderline between human and computer understandability, the modeling language would be able to express the semantics of published Web documents. Reporting on work in progress, presents the overall framework and ideas

Date

9. 9.2000 17:22:23

0.018134736 = product of:
  0.07253894 = sum of:
    0.07253894 = product of:
      0.10880841 = sum of:
        0.0743154 = weight(_text_:language in 2626) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0743154 = score(doc=2626,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.16497234 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9232929 = idf(docFreq=2376, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042049456 = queryNorm
            0.45047188 = fieldWeight in 2626, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.9232929 = idf(docFreq=2376, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2626)
        0.03449301 = weight(_text_:29 in 2626) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03449301 = score(doc=2626,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14791684 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042049456 = queryNorm
            0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 2626, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2626)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Even as the number of Web-enabled resources and knowledge repositories continues its unabated climb, both general purpose and domain-specific metadata schemas are in vigorous development. While this might be viewed as a promising direction for more precise access to disparate metadata-enabled resources, semantically-oriented tools to facilitate cross-domain searching by end-users unfamiliar with structured approaches to language or particular metadata schema conventions have received little attention. This paper describes findings from a focus group assessment of a natural language "gateway" previously derived from mapping, then categorizing terminology from nine metadata schemas. Semantic ambiguities identified in relation to three core metadata elements, namely, "Names", "Title", and "Subject", are discussed relative to data collection techniques employed in the research. Implications for further research, and particularly that pertaining to the design of an Interlingua gateway to multilingual, metadata-enabled resources, are addressed.

Date

29. 8.2004 9:04:54

0.01586188 = product of:
  0.06344752 = sum of:
    0.06344752 = product of:
      0.09517127 = sum of:
        0.06067826 = weight(_text_:language in 3355) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06067826 = score(doc=3355,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16497234 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9232929 = idf(docFreq=2376, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042049456 = queryNorm
            0.3678087 = fieldWeight in 3355, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.9232929 = idf(docFreq=2376, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3355)
        0.03449301 = weight(_text_:29 in 3355) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03449301 = score(doc=3355,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14791684 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042049456 = queryNorm
            0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 3355, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3355)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Resource description and discovery have been facilitated generally in two approaches, namely bibliographic control and metadata, which now may converge in response to current issues and challenges of providing subject access. Four categories of major issues and challenges in the provision of subject access to digital and non-digital resources are: 1) the advancement of new knowledge; 2) the fall of controlled vocabulary and the rise of natural language; 3) digitizing and networking the traditional catalogue systems; and 4) electronic publishing and the Internet. The creation of new knowledge and the debate about the use of natural language and controlled vocabulary as subject headings becomes even more intense in the digital and online environment. The third and fourth categories are conceived after the emergence of networked environments and the rapid expansion of electronic resources. Recognizing the convergence of metadata schemas and bibliographic control calls for adapting to the new environment by developing tools that exploit the strengths of both.

Source

Knowledge organization. 37(2010) no.1, S.29-42