Search (99 results, page 1 of 5)

  • × language_ss:"e"
  • × theme_ss:"Metadaten"
  1. White, H.: Examining scientific vocabulary : mapping controlled vocabularies with free text keywords (2013) 0.04
    0.039400067 = product of:
      0.1182002 = sum of:
        0.1182002 = sum of:
          0.064347476 = weight(_text_:indexing in 1953) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.064347476 = score(doc=1953,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                0.049684696 = queryNorm
              0.3383389 = fieldWeight in 1953, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1953)
          0.053852726 = weight(_text_:22 in 1953) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.053852726 = score(doc=1953,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.049684696 = queryNorm
              0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1953, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1953)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Scientific repositories create a new environment for studying traditional information science issues. The interaction between indexing terms provided by users and controlled vocabularies continues to be an area of debate and study. This article reports and analyzes findings from a study that mapped the relationships between free text keywords and controlled vocabulary terms used in the sciences. Based on this study's findings recommendations are made about which vocabularies may be better to use in scientific data repositories.
    Date
    29. 5.2015 19:09:22
  2. Crowston, K.; Kwasnik, B.H.: Can document-genre metadata improve information access to large digital collections? (2004) 0.03
    0.029886894 = product of:
      0.08966068 = sum of:
        0.08966068 = weight(_text_:systematic in 824) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08966068 = score(doc=824,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.28397155 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.31573826 = fieldWeight in 824, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=824)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    We discuss the issues of resolving the information-retrieval problem in large digital collections through the identification and use of document genres. Explicit identification of genre seems particularly important for such collections because any search usually retrieves documents with a diversity of genres that are undifferentiated by obvious clues as to their identity. Also, because most genres are characterized by both form and purpose, identifying the genre of a document provides information as to the document's purpose and its fit to the user's situation, which can be otherwise difficult to assess. We begin by outlining the possible role of genre identification in the information-retrieval process. Our assumption is that genre identification would enhance searching, first because we know that topic alone is not enough to define an information problem and, second, because search results containing genre information would be more easily understandable. Next, we discuss how information professionals have traditionally tackled the issues of representing genre in settings where topical representation is the norm. Finally, we address the issues of studying the efficacy of identifying genre in large digital collections. Because genre is often an implicit notion, studying it in a systematic way presents many problems. We outline a research protocol that would provide guidance for identifying Web document genres, for observing how genre is used in searching and evaluating search results, and finally for representing and visualizing genres.
  3. Desai, B.C.: Supporting discovery in virtual libraries (1997) 0.02
    0.018575516 = product of:
      0.055726547 = sum of:
        0.055726547 = product of:
          0.11145309 = sum of:
            0.11145309 = weight(_text_:indexing in 543) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.11145309 = score(doc=543,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.5860202 = fieldWeight in 543, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=543)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Discusses the development and implementation of models for indexing and searching information resources on the Internet. Examines briefly the results of a simple query on a number of existing search systems and discusses 2 proposed index metadata structures for indexing and supporting search and discovery: The Dublin Core Elements List and the Semantic Header. Presents an indexing and discovery system based on the Semantic Header
  4. Andresen, L.: Metadata in Denmark (2000) 0.02
    0.01795091 = product of:
      0.053852726 = sum of:
        0.053852726 = product of:
          0.10770545 = sum of:
            0.10770545 = weight(_text_:22 in 4899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.10770545 = score(doc=4899,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 4899, 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=4899)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    16. 7.2000 20:58:22
  5. MARC and metadata : METS, MODS, and MARCXML: current and future implications (2004) 0.02
    0.01795091 = product of:
      0.053852726 = sum of:
        0.053852726 = product of:
          0.10770545 = sum of:
            0.10770545 = weight(_text_:22 in 2840) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.10770545 = score(doc=2840,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 2840, 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=2840)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1
  6. Moen, W.E.: ¬The metadata approach to accessing government information (2001) 0.02
    0.015707046 = product of:
      0.047121134 = sum of:
        0.047121134 = product of:
          0.09424227 = sum of:
            0.09424227 = weight(_text_:22 in 4407) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09424227 = score(doc=4407,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4407, 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=4407)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    28. 3.2002 9:22:34
  7. MARC and metadata : METS, MODS, and MARCXML: current and future implications (2004) 0.02
    0.015707046 = product of:
      0.047121134 = sum of:
        0.047121134 = product of:
          0.09424227 = sum of:
            0.09424227 = weight(_text_:22 in 7196) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09424227 = score(doc=7196,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 7196, 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=7196)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1
  8. MARC and metadata : METS, MODS, and MARCXML: current and future implications part 2 (2004) 0.02
    0.015707046 = product of:
      0.047121134 = sum of:
        0.047121134 = product of:
          0.09424227 = sum of:
            0.09424227 = weight(_text_:22 in 2841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09424227 = score(doc=2841,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 2841, 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=2841)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2
  9. a cataloger's primer : Metadata (2005) 0.01
    0.014943447 = product of:
      0.04483034 = sum of:
        0.04483034 = weight(_text_:systematic in 133) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04483034 = score(doc=133,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.28397155 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.15786913 = fieldWeight in 133, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=133)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Footnote
    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:
  10. Slavic, A.: General library classification in learning material metadata : the application in IMS/LOM and CDMES metadata schemas (2003) 0.01
    0.013931636 = product of:
      0.041794907 = sum of:
        0.041794907 = product of:
          0.083589815 = sum of:
            0.083589815 = weight(_text_:indexing in 3961) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.083589815 = score(doc=3961,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.4395151 = fieldWeight in 3961, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3961)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    This paper analyses the approach to resource discovery in the educational domain and stresses this community's need for a subject approach to information. The use of both general (Dublin Core) and domain specific (IEEE Learning Object Metadata/IMS Metadata) metadata schemas for learning resource discovery suggests that library classification could be used for subject description. There are several reasons why this indexing language might be suitable for the indexing of education resources. The paper will explain the reasoning behind the application of Universal Decimal Classification in the EASEL (Educator's Access to Services in the Electronic Landscape - http://www.fdgroup.com/easel) project. EASEL deploys two Dublin Core and several different application profiles of LOM i.e. IMS Metadata and this paper will explain how these two types of metadata support the use of classification.
    Source
    Subject retrieval in a networked environment: Proceedings of the IFLA Satellite Meeting held in Dublin, OH, 14-16 August 2001 and sponsored by the IFLA Classification and Indexing Section, the IFLA Information Technology Section and OCLC. Ed.: I.C. McIlwaine
  11. Broughton, V.: Automatic metadata generation : Digital resource description without human intervention (2007) 0.01
    0.0134631805 = product of:
      0.04038954 = sum of:
        0.04038954 = product of:
          0.08077908 = sum of:
            0.08077908 = weight(_text_:22 in 6048) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08077908 = score(doc=6048,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6048, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6048)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    22. 9.2007 15:41:14
  12. Derrot, S.; Koskas, M.: My fair metadata : cataloging legal deposit Ebooks at the National Library of France (2016) 0.01
    0.013270989 = product of:
      0.039812967 = sum of:
        0.039812967 = product of:
          0.079625934 = sum of:
            0.079625934 = weight(_text_:indexing in 5140) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.079625934 = score(doc=5140,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.41867304 = fieldWeight in 5140, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5140)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    French law on digital legal deposit covers websites and online content as well as ebooks. It imposes no obligation to produce a bibliography, indexing being sufficient. But despite their innovative characteristics, ebooks are still books, and their metadata is closer to that of printed materials than to the web indexing. To set up an ebook deposit workflow, the BnF benefits from its experience with digital documents and its tradition of legal deposit. This is to present the questions that it faces when dealing with the cataloging of ebooks and the management of their metadata, and the solutions that are emerging.
  13. Ashton, J.; Kent, C.: New approaches to subject indexing at the British Library (2017) 0.01
    0.013270989 = product of:
      0.039812967 = sum of:
        0.039812967 = product of:
          0.079625934 = sum of:
            0.079625934 = weight(_text_:indexing in 5158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.079625934 = score(doc=5158,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.41867304 = fieldWeight in 5158, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5158)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    The constantly changing metadata landscape means that libraries need to re-think their approach to standards and subject analysis, to enable the discovery of vast areas of both print and digital content. This article presents a case study from the British Library that assesses the feasibility of adopting FAST (Faceted Application of Subject Terminology) to selectively extend the scope of subject indexing of current and legacy content, or implement FAST as a replacement for all LCSH in current cataloging workflows.
  14. Caplan, P.; Guenther, R.: Metadata for Internet resources : the Dublin Core Metadata Elements Set and its mapping to USMARC (1996) 0.01
    0.01269321 = product of:
      0.038079627 = sum of:
        0.038079627 = product of:
          0.07615925 = sum of:
            0.07615925 = weight(_text_:22 in 2408) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07615925 = score(doc=2408,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 2408, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2408)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    13. 1.2007 18:31:22
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) nos.3/4, S.43-58
  15. Tennant, R.: ¬A bibliographic metadata infrastructure for the twenty-first century (2004) 0.01
    0.01269321 = product of:
      0.038079627 = sum of:
        0.038079627 = product of:
          0.07615925 = sum of:
            0.07615925 = weight(_text_:22 in 2845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07615925 = score(doc=2845,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 2845, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2845)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    9.12.2005 19:22:38
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.175-181
  16. Benz, J.; Voigt, K.: Indexing file system for the set-up of metadatabases in environmental sciences on the Internet (1995) 0.01
    0.011375135 = product of:
      0.034125403 = sum of:
        0.034125403 = product of:
          0.068250805 = sum of:
            0.068250805 = weight(_text_:indexing in 3865) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.068250805 = score(doc=3865,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.3588626 = fieldWeight in 3865, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3865)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Describes an approach to retrieving environmental sciences information on the Internet using metadatabases. an inf-sheet is created in a flat file system for each resource. The contents of theses sheets are structured by different fields which hold different types of information. 2 classes of information can be distinguished: information describing the content of a resource, which is searchable, and information which links to the resources (URL). A rough automated selection is performed, humans analyze the pre selected resources, and a final selection and indexing is carried out. An algorithm which controle the validity of the meta information is implemented. Describes 2 implemented examples, the Register of Ecological Models and the Metadatabase of Internet Resources
  17. Kopácsi, S. et al.: Development of a classification server to support metadata harmonization in a long term preservation system (2016) 0.01
    0.011219318 = product of:
      0.033657953 = sum of:
        0.033657953 = product of:
          0.06731591 = sum of:
            0.06731591 = weight(_text_:22 in 3280) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06731591 = score(doc=3280,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3280, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3280)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    Metadata and semantics research: 10th International Conference, MTSR 2016, Göttingen, Germany, November 22-25, 2016, Proceedings. Eds.: E. Garoufallou
  18. Hajra, A. et al.: Enriching scientific publications from LOD repositories through word embeddings approach (2016) 0.01
    0.011219318 = product of:
      0.033657953 = sum of:
        0.033657953 = product of:
          0.06731591 = sum of:
            0.06731591 = weight(_text_:22 in 3281) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06731591 = score(doc=3281,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3281, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3281)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    Metadata and semantics research: 10th International Conference, MTSR 2016, Göttingen, Germany, November 22-25, 2016, Proceedings. Eds.: E. Garoufallou
  19. Mora-Mcginity, M. et al.: MusicWeb: music discovery with open linked semantic metadata (2016) 0.01
    0.011219318 = product of:
      0.033657953 = sum of:
        0.033657953 = product of:
          0.06731591 = sum of:
            0.06731591 = weight(_text_:22 in 3282) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06731591 = score(doc=3282,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3282, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3282)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    Metadata and semantics research: 10th International Conference, MTSR 2016, Göttingen, Germany, November 22-25, 2016, Proceedings. Eds.: E. Garoufallou
  20. Lynch, C.: Metadata: moving from planning to implementation (1997) 0.01
    0.01072458 = product of:
      0.032173738 = sum of:
        0.032173738 = product of:
          0.064347476 = sum of:
            0.064347476 = weight(_text_:indexing in 1429) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.064347476 = score(doc=1429,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049684696 = queryNorm
                0.3383389 = fieldWeight in 1429, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1429)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Highlights some relevant issues associated with the transition from consideration of the theoretical aspects of metadata systems to their implementation. Pays particular attention to the possible role of the Dublin Core and the requirements for new WWW indexing services

Types

  • a 90
  • el 11
  • s 5
  • b 2
  • m 2
  • More… Less…

Classifications