Search (179 results, page 1 of 9)

0.0805053 = product of:
  0.40252647 = sum of:
    0.40252647 = weight(_text_:3a in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.40252647 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.42972976 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050687566 = queryNorm
        0.93669677 = fieldWeight in 1826, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1826)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CDQQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdigbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de%2Fvolltexte%2Fdocuments%2F3131107&ei=HzFWVYvGMsiNsgGTyoFI&usg=AFQjCNE2FHUeR9oQTQlNC4TPedv4Mo3DaQ&sig2=Rlzpr7a3BLZZkqZCXXN_IA&bvm=bv.93564037,d.bGg&cad=rja

0.06440424 = product of:
  0.3220212 = sum of:
    0.3220212 = weight(_text_:3a in 230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.3220212 = score(doc=230,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.42972976 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050687566 = queryNorm
        0.7493574 = fieldWeight in 230, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=230)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

https%3A%2F%2Ftannerlectures.utah.edu%2F_documents%2Fa-to-z%2Fp%2Fpopper80.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3f4QRTEH-OEBmoYr2J_c7H

0.049312394 = product of:
  0.24656196 = sum of:
    0.24656196 = weight(_text_:line in 6909) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.24656196 = score(doc=6909,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.28424788 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050687566 = queryNorm
        0.8674188 = fieldWeight in 6909, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6909)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

0.042267766 = product of:
  0.21133882 = sum of:
    0.21133882 = weight(_text_:line in 4130) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.21133882 = score(doc=4130,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.28424788 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050687566 = queryNorm
        0.74350184 = fieldWeight in 4130, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4130)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

0.04025265 = product of:
  0.20126323 = sum of:
    0.20126323 = weight(_text_:3a in 4388) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.20126323 = score(doc=4388,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.42972976 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050687566 = queryNorm
        0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 4388, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4388)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Footnote

Vgl. unter: https://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwizweHljdbcAhVS16QKHXcFD9QQFjABegQICRAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchgate.net%2Fpublication%2F271200105_Die_Autonomie_des_Menschen_und_der_Maschine_-_gegenwartige_Definitionen_von_Autonomie_zwischen_philosophischem_Hintergrund_und_technologischer_Umsetzbarkeit_Redigierte_Version_der_Magisterarbeit_Karls&usg=AOvVaw06orrdJmFF2xbCCp_hL26q.

0.04025265 = product of:
  0.20126323 = sum of:
    0.20126323 = weight(_text_:3a in 5669) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.20126323 = score(doc=5669,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.42972976 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050687566 = queryNorm
        0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 5669, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5669)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Content

"Die Englischsprachige Wikipedia verfügt jetzt über mehr als 6 Millionen Artikel. An zweiter Stelle kommt die deutschsprachige Wikipedia mit 2.3 Millionen Artikeln, an dritter Stelle steht die französischsprachige Wikipedia mit 2.1 Millionen Artikeln (via Researchbuzz: Firehose <https://rbfirehose.com/2020/01/24/techcrunch-wikipedia-now-has-more-than-6-million-articles-in-english/> und Techcrunch <https://techcrunch.com/2020/01/23/wikipedia-english-six-million-articles/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Techcrunch+%28TechCrunch%29&guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly9yYmZpcmVob3NlLmNvbS8yMDIwLzAxLzI0L3RlY2hjcnVuY2gtd2lraXBlZGlhLW5vdy1oYXMtbW9yZS10aGFuLTYtbWlsbGlvbi1hcnRpY2xlcy1pbi1lbmdsaXNoLw&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAK0zHfjdDZ_spFZBF_z-zDjtL5iWvuKDumFTzm4HvQzkUfE2pLXQzGS6FGB_y-VISdMEsUSvkNsg2U_NWQ4lwWSvOo3jvXo1I3GtgHpP8exukVxYAnn5mJspqX50VHIWFADHhs5AerkRn3hMRtf_R3F1qmEbo8EROZXp328HMC-o>). 250120 via digithek ch = #fineBlog s.a.: Angesichts der Veröffentlichung des 6-millionsten Artikels vergangene Woche in der englischsprachigen Wikipedia hat die Community-Zeitungsseite "Wikipedia Signpost" ein Moratorium bei der Veröffentlichung von Unternehmensartikeln gefordert. Das sei kein Vorwurf gegen die Wikimedia Foundation, aber die derzeitigen Maßnahmen, um die Enzyklopädie gegen missbräuchliches undeklariertes Paid Editing zu schützen, funktionierten ganz klar nicht. *"Da die ehrenamtlichen Autoren derzeit von Werbung in Gestalt von Wikipedia-Artikeln überwältigt werden, und da die WMF nicht in der Lage zu sein scheint, dem irgendetwas entgegenzusetzen, wäre der einzige gangbare Weg für die Autoren, fürs erste die Neuanlage von Artikeln über Unternehmen zu untersagen"*, schreibt der Benutzer Smallbones in seinem Editorial <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2020-01-27/From_the_editor> zur heutigen Ausgabe."

0.035223138 = product of:
  0.17611568 = sum of:
    0.17611568 = weight(_text_:line in 1717) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17611568 = score(doc=1717,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.28424788 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050687566 = queryNorm
        0.61958486 = fieldWeight in 1717, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1717)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

0.029887825 = product of:
  0.14943913 = sum of:
    0.14943913 = weight(_text_:line in 940) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14943913 = score(doc=940,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.28424788 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050687566 = queryNorm
        0.52573526 = fieldWeight in 940, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=940)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Traditional on-line search services such as Dialog, DataStar and Lexis provide a wide range of search features (boolean and proximity operators, truncation, etc). This paper discusses the use of these features for effective searching, and argues that these features are required, regardless of advances in search engine technology. The literature on on-line searching is reviewed, identifying features that searchers find desirable for effective searching. A selective survey of current digital libraries available on the Web was undertaken, identifying which search features are present. The survey indicates that current digital libraries do not implement a wide range of search features. For instance: under half of the examples included controlled vocabulary, under half had proximity searching, only one enabled browsing of term indexes, and none of the digital libraries enable searchers to refine an initial search. Suggestions are made for enhancing the search effectiveness of digital libraries; for instance, by providing a full range of search operators, enabling browsing of search terms, enhancement of records with controlled vocabulary, enabling the refining of initial searches, etc.

0.029887825 = product of:
  0.14943913 = sum of:
    0.14943913 = weight(_text_:line in 471) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14943913 = score(doc=471,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.28424788 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050687566 = queryNorm
        0.52573526 = fieldWeight in 471, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=471)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

The paper summarizes the results of an on-line survey which was executed 2010 in german archives of all branches. The survey focused on metadata and used metadata standards for the annotation of audiovisual media like pictures, audio and video files (analog and digital). The findings motivate the question whether archives are able to collaborate in projects like europeana if they do not use accepted standards for their orientation. Archives need more resources and archival staff need more training to execute more complex tasks in an digital and semantic surrounding.

0.024403308 = product of:
  0.122016534 = sum of:
    0.122016534 = weight(_text_:line in 1185) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.122016534 = score(doc=1185,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.28424788 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050687566 = queryNorm
        0.42926103 = fieldWeight in 1185, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1185)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

From their earliest encounters with the Web, museums have seen an opportunity to move beyond uni-directional communication into an environment that engages their users and reflects a multiplicity of perspectives. Shedding the "Unassailable Voice" (Walsh 1997) in favor of many "Points of View" (Sledge 1995) has challenged traditional museum approaches to the creation and delivery of content. Novel approaches are required in order to develop and sustain user engagement (Durbin 2004). New models of exhibit creation that democratize the curatorial functions of object selection and interpretation offer one way of opening up the museum (Coldicutt and Streten 2005). Another is to use the museum as a forum and focus for community story-telling (Howard, Pratty et al. 2005). Unfortunately, museum collections remain relatively inaccessible even when 'made available' through searchable on-line databases. Museum documentation seldom satisfies the on-line access needs of the broad public, both because it is written using professional terminology and because it may not address what is important to - or remembered by - the museum visitor. For example, an exhibition now on-line at The Metropolitan Museum of Art acknowledges "Coco" Chanel only in the brief, textual introduction (The Metropolitan Museum of Art 2005a). All of the images of her delightful fashion designs are attributed to "Gabrielle Chanel" (The Metropolitan Museum of Art 2005a). Interfaces that organize collections along axes of time or place - such of that of the Timeline of Art History (The Metropolitan Museum of Art 2005e) - often fail to match users' world-views, despite the care that went into their structuring or their significant pedagogical utility. Critically, as professionals working with art museums we realize that when cataloguers and curators describe works of art, they usually do not include the "subject" of the image itself. Simply put, we rarely answer the question "What is it a picture of?" Unfortunately, visitors will often remember a work based on its visual characteristics, only to find that Web-based searches for any of the things they recall do not produce results.

0.02197589 = product of:
  0.10987945 = sum of:
    0.10987945 = weight(_text_:22 in 5449) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10987945 = score(doc=5449,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17749922 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050687566 = queryNorm
        0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 5449, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5449)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 2.1997 19:26:34

0.02197589 = product of:
  0.10987945 = sum of:
    0.10987945 = weight(_text_:22 in 5837) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10987945 = score(doc=5837,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17749922 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050687566 = queryNorm
        0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 5837, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5837)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

30.11.1996 13:22:37

0.02197589 = product of:
  0.10987945 = sum of:
    0.10987945 = weight(_text_:22 in 4085) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10987945 = score(doc=4085,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17749922 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050687566 = queryNorm
        0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 4085, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4085)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

7.11.1999 18:22:39

0.021498568 = product of:
  0.10749284 = sum of:
    0.10749284 = weight(_text_:22 in 1936) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10749284 = score(doc=1936,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.17749922 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050687566 = queryNorm
        0.6055961 = fieldWeight in 1936, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1936)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Dewey Decimal Classification and Relative Index, Edition 22 (DDC 22) will be issued simultaneously in print and web versions in July 2003. The new edition is the first full print update to the Dewey Decimal Classification system in seven years-it includes several significant updates and many new numbers and topics. DDC 22 also features some fundamental structural changes that have been introduced with the goals of promoting classifier efficiency and improving the DDC for use in a variety of applications in the web environment. Most importantly, the content of the new edition has been shaped by the needs and recommendations of Dewey users around the world. The worldwide user community has an important role in shaping the future of the DDC.

Object

DDC-22

0.021133883 = product of:
  0.10566941 = sum of:
    0.10566941 = weight(_text_:line in 3458) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10566941 = score(doc=3458,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.28424788 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050687566 = queryNorm
        0.37175092 = fieldWeight in 3458, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3458)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

ANDREW, K. u. F. KAPPE: Serving information to the Web with Hyper-G; BARBIERI, K., H.M. DOERR u. D. DWYER: Creating a virtual classroom for interactive education on the Web; CAMPBELL, J.K., S.B. JONES, N.M. STEPHENS u. S. HURLEY: Constructing educational courseware using NCSA Mosaic and the World Wide Web; CATLEDGE, L.L. u. J.E. PITKOW: Characterizing browsing strategies in the World-Wide Web; CLAUSNITZER, A. u. P. VOGEL: A WWW interface to the OMNIS/Myriad literature retrieval engine; FISCHER, R. u. L. PERROCHON: IDLE: Unified W3-access to interactive information servers; FOLEY, J.D.: Visualizing the World-Wide Web with the navigational view builder; FRANKLIN, S.D. u. B. IBRAHIM: Advanced educational uses of the World-Wide Web; FUHR, N., U. PFEIFER u. T. HUYNH: Searching structured documents with the enhanced retrieval functionality of free WAIS-sf and SFgate; FIORITO, M., J. OKSANEN u. D.R. IOIVANE: An educational environment using WWW; KENT, R.E. u. C. NEUSS: Conceptual analysis of resource meta-information; SHELDON, M.A. u. R. WEISS: Discover: a resource discovery system based on content routing; WINOGRAD, T.: Beyond browsing: shared comments, SOAPs, Trails, and On-line communities

0.021133883 = product of:
  0.10566941 = sum of:
    0.10566941 = weight(_text_:line in 3390) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10566941 = score(doc=3390,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.28424788 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050687566 = queryNorm
        0.37175092 = fieldWeight in 3390, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3390)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

The automated categorisation (or classification) of texts into topical categories has a long history, dating back at least to 1960. Until the late '80s, the dominant approach to the problem involved knowledge-engineering automatic categorisers, i.e. manually building a set of rules encoding expert knowledge an how to classify documents. In the '90s, with the booming production and availability of on-line documents, automated text categorisation has witnessed an increased and renewed interest. A newer paradigm based an machine learning has superseded the previous approach. Within this paradigm, a general inductive process automatically builds a classifier by "learning", from a set of previously classified documents, the characteristics of one or more categories; the advantages are a very good effectiveness, a considerable savings in terms of expert manpower, and domain independence. In this tutorial we look at the main approaches that have been taken towards automatic text categorisation within the general machine learning paradigm. Issues of document indexing, classifier construction, and classifier evaluation, will be touched upon.

0.021133883 = product of:
  0.10566941 = sum of:
    0.10566941 = weight(_text_:line in 1173) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10566941 = score(doc=1173,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.28424788 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050687566 = queryNorm
        0.37175092 = fieldWeight in 1173, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1173)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Popular commercial on-line services such as Google, e-Bay, Amazon, and Netflix have evolved quickly over the last decade to help people find what they want, developing information retrieval strategies such as usefully ranked results, spelling correction, and recommender systems. Online library catalogs (OPACs), in contrast, have changed little and are notoriously difficult for patrons to use (University of California Libraries, 2005). Over the past year (June 2005 to the present), the Melvyl Recommender Project (California Digital Library, 2005) has been exploring methods and feasibility of closing the gap between features that library patrons want and have come to expect from information retrieval systems and what libraries are currently equipped to deliver. The project team conducted exploratory work in five topic areas: relevance ranking, auto-correction, use of a text-based discovery system, user interface strategies, and recommending. This article focuses specifically on the recommending portion of the project and potential extensions to that work.

0.021133883 = product of:
  0.10566941 = sum of:
    0.10566941 = weight(_text_:line in 1225) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10566941 = score(doc=1225,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.28424788 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050687566 = queryNorm
        0.37175092 = fieldWeight in 1225, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1225)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

The Greenstone digital library software is an open-source system for the construction and presentation of information collections. It builds collections with effective full-text searching and metadata-based browsing facilities that are attractive and easy to use. Moreover, they are easily maintained and can be augmented and rebuilt entirely automatically. The system is extensible: software "plugins" accommodate different document and metadata types. Greenstone incorporates an interface that makes it easy for people to create their own library collections. Collections may be built and served locally from the user's own web server, or (given appropriate permissions) remotely on a shared digital library host. End users can easily build new collections styled after existing ones from material on the Web or from their local files (or both), and collections can be updated and new ones brought on-line at any time.

0.021133883 = product of:
  0.10566941 = sum of:
    0.10566941 = weight(_text_:line in 336) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10566941 = score(doc=336,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.28424788 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050687566 = queryNorm
        0.37175092 = fieldWeight in 336, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=336)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

We present a resource for automatically associating strings of text with English Wikipedia concepts. Our machinery is bi-directional, in the sense that it uses the same fundamental probabilistic methods to map strings to empirical distributions over Wikipedia articles as it does to map article URLs to distributions over short, language-independent strings of natural language text. For maximal interoperability, we release our resource as a set of ?at line-based text ?les, lexicographically sorted and encoded with UTF-8. These files capture joint probability distributions underlying concepts (we use the terms article, concept and Wikipedia URL interchangeably) and associated snippets of text, as well as other features that can come in handy when working with Wikipedia articles and related information.

0.019424126 = product of:
  0.09712063 = sum of:
    0.09712063 = weight(_text_:22 in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09712063 = score(doc=3925,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.17749922 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050687566 = queryNorm
        0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 3925, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3925)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 7.2006 15:22:28