Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Semantic Web"
  • × theme_ss:"Formalerschließung"
  1. Tillett, B.B.: AACR2 and metadata : library opportunities in the global semantic Web (2003) 0.05
    0.045742862 = product of:
      0.091485724 = sum of:
        0.051698197 = weight(_text_:digital in 5510) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.051698197 = score(doc=5510,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.26148933 = fieldWeight in 5510, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5510)
        0.039787523 = weight(_text_:library in 5510) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039787523 = score(doc=5510,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.30190483 = fieldWeight in 5510, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5510)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Explores the opportunities for libraries to contribute to the proposed global "Semantic Web." Library name and subject authority files, including work that IFLA has done related to a new view of "Universal Bibliographic Control" in the Internet environment and the work underway in the U.S. and Europe, are making a reality of the virtual international authority file on the Web. The bibliographic and authority records created according to AACR2 reflect standards for metadata that libraries have provided for years. New opportunities for using these records in the digital world are described (interoperability), including mapping with Dublin Core metadata. AACR2 recently updated Chapter 9 on Electronic Resources. That process and highlights of the changes are described, including Library of Congress' rule interpretations.
  2. Willer, M.; Dunsire, G.: Bibliographic information organization in the Semantic Web (2013) 0.01
    0.008289068 = product of:
      0.033156272 = sum of:
        0.033156272 = weight(_text_:library in 2143) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033156272 = score(doc=2143,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.25158736 = fieldWeight in 2143, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2143)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    New technologies will underpin the future generation of library catalogues. To facilitate their role providing information, serving users, and fulfilling their mission as cultural heritage and memory institutions, libraries must take a technological leap; their standards and services must be transformed to those of the Semantic Web. Bibliographic Information Organization in the Semantic Web explores the technologies that may power future library catalogues, and argues the necessity of such a leap. The text introduces international bibliographic standards and models, and fundamental concepts in their representation in the context of the Semantic Web. Subsequent chapters cover bibliographic information organization, linked open data, methodologies for publishing library metadata, discussion of the wider environment (museum, archival and publishing communities) and users, followed by a conclusion.
  3. Harlow, C.: Data munging tools in Preparation for RDF : Catmandu and LODRefine (2015) 0.01
    0.008289068 = product of:
      0.033156272 = sum of:
        0.033156272 = weight(_text_:library in 2277) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033156272 = score(doc=2277,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.25158736 = fieldWeight in 2277, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2277)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Data munging, or the work of remediating, enhancing and transforming library datasets for new or improved uses, has become more important and staff-inclusive in many library technology discussions and projects. Many times we know how we want our data to look, as well as how we want our data to act in discovery interfaces or when exposed, but we are uncertain how to make the data we have into the data we want. This article introduces and compares two library data munging tools that can help: LODRefine (OpenRefine with the DERI RDF Extension) and Catmandu. The strengths and best practices of each tool are discussed in the context of metadata munging use cases for an institution's metadata migration workflow. There is a focus on Linked Open Data modeling and transformation applications of each tool, in particular how metadataists, catalogers, and programmers can create metadata quality reports, enhance existing data with LOD sets, and transform that data to a RDF model. Integration of these tools with other systems and projects, the use of domain specific transformation languages, and the expansion of vocabulary reconciliation services are mentioned.
  4. Gartner, R.: Metadata : shaping knowledge from antiquity to the semantic web (2016) 0.01
    0.0067679947 = product of:
      0.027071979 = sum of:
        0.027071979 = weight(_text_:library in 731) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027071979 = score(doc=731,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.2054202 = fieldWeight in 731, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=731)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    LCSH
    Library science
    Subject
    Library science
  5. Ilik, V.: Cataloger makeover : creating non-MARC name authorities (2015) 0.01
    0.006699973 = product of:
      0.026799891 = sum of:
        0.026799891 = weight(_text_:library in 1884) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026799891 = score(doc=1884,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.20335563 = fieldWeight in 1884, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1884)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Content
    Beitrag in einem Themenheft: Reshaping the Library Catalog: Selected Papers from the International Conference FSR2014 (Rome, February 27-28, 2014).
  6. Willer, M.; Dunsire, G.: ISBD, the UNIMARC bibliographic format, and RDA : interoperability issues in namespaces and the linked data environment (2014) 0.01
    0.006699973 = product of:
      0.026799891 = sum of:
        0.026799891 = weight(_text_:library in 1999) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026799891 = score(doc=1999,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.20335563 = fieldWeight in 1999, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1999)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    The article is an updated and expanded version of a paper presented to International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions in 2013. It describes recent work involving the representation of International Standard for Bibliographic Description (ISBD) and UNIMARC (UNIversal MARC) in Resource Description Framework (RDF), the basis of the Semantic Web and linked data. The UNIMARC Bibliographic format is used to illustrate issues arising from the development of a bibliographic element set and its semantic alignment with ISBD. The article discusses the use of such alignments in the automated processing of linked data for interoperability, using examples from ISBD, UNIMARC, and Resource Description and Access.