Search (175 results, page 1 of 9)

0.15357567 = product of:
  0.30715135 = sum of:
    0.30715135 = sum of:
      0.26678067 = weight(_text_:1.0 in 6122) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.26678067 = score(doc=6122,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.32222155 = queryWeight, product of:
            7.5697527 = idf(docFreq=61, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042566985 = queryNorm
          0.8279417 = fieldWeight in 6122, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            7.5697527 = idf(docFreq=61, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6122)
      0.040370673 = weight(_text_:22 in 6122) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.040370673 = score(doc=6122,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14906234 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042566985 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 6122, 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=6122)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Noch ist nicht entschieden mit welcher Vehemenz das sogenannte Web 2.0 die Bibliotheken verändern wird. Allerdings wird hier und da bereits mit Bezugnahme auf das sogenannte Semantic Web von einer dritten und mancherorts von einer vierten Generation des Web gesprochen. Der Vortrag hinterfragt kritisch, welche Konzepte sich hinter diesen Bezeichnungen verbergen und geht der Frage nach, welche Herausforderungen eine Übernahme dieser Konzepte für die Bibliothekswelt mit sich bringen würde. Vgl. insbes. Folie 22 mit einer Darstellung von der Entwicklung vom Web 1.0 zum Web 4.0

0.10779566 = product of:
  0.21559133 = sum of:
    0.21559133 = product of:
      0.43118265 = sum of:
        0.43118265 = weight(_text_:1.0 in 5212) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.43118265 = score(doc=5212,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32222155 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.5697527 = idf(docFreq=61, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042566985 = queryNorm
            1.3381559 = fieldWeight in 5212, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.5697527 = idf(docFreq=61, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5212)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Issue

Version 1.0. Stand: Dezember 1998. Demo-CD.

0.094321206 = product of:
  0.18864241 = sum of:
    0.18864241 = product of:
      0.37728482 = sum of:
        0.37728482 = weight(_text_:1.0 in 8985) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.37728482 = score(doc=8985,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32222155 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.5697527 = idf(docFreq=61, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042566985 = queryNorm
            1.1708864 = fieldWeight in 8985, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.5697527 = idf(docFreq=61, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=8985)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Issue

Version 1.0.

0.094321206 = product of:
  0.18864241 = sum of:
    0.18864241 = product of:
      0.37728482 = sum of:
        0.37728482 = weight(_text_:1.0 in 3468) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.37728482 = score(doc=3468,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32222155 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.5697527 = idf(docFreq=61, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042566985 = queryNorm
            1.1708864 = fieldWeight in 3468, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.5697527 = idf(docFreq=61, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3468)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This document supersedes the DC element set, ver. 1.0

0.08084675 = product of:
  0.1616935 = sum of:
    0.1616935 = product of:
      0.323387 = sum of:
        0.323387 = weight(_text_:1.0 in 1623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.323387 = score(doc=1623,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.32222155 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.5697527 = idf(docFreq=61, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042566985 = queryNorm
            1.0036169 = fieldWeight in 1623, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              7.5697527 = idf(docFreq=61, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1623)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This specification provides a model and grammar for representing the structure of information resources used to define topics, and the associations (relationships) between topics. Names, resources, and relationships are said to be characteristics of abstract subjects, which are called topics. Topics have their characteristics within scopes: i.e. the limited contexts within which the names and resources are regarded as their name, resource, and relationship characteristics. One or more interrelated documents employing this grammar is called a topic map.TopicMaps.Org is an independent consortium of parties developing the applicability of the topic map paradigm [ISO13250] to the World Wide Web by leveraging the XML family of specifications. This specification describes version 1.0 of XML Topic Maps (XTM) 1.0 [XTM], an abstract model and XML grammar for interchanging Web-based topic maps, written by the members of the TopicMaps.Org Authoring Group. More information on XTM and TopicMaps.Org is available at http://www.topicmaps.org/about.html. All versions of the XTM Specification are permanently licensed to the public, as provided by the Charter of TopicMaps.Org.

Source

http://www.topicmaps.org/xtm/1.0/xtm1-20010806.html

0.067372285 = product of:
  0.13474457 = sum of:
    0.13474457 = product of:
      0.26948914 = sum of:
        0.26948914 = weight(_text_:1.0 in 6673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.26948914 = score(doc=6673,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32222155 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.5697527 = idf(docFreq=61, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042566985 = queryNorm
            0.8363474 = fieldWeight in 6673, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.5697527 = idf(docFreq=61, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=6673)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

http://www.xfml.org/spec/1.0.html

0.06669517 = product of:
  0.13339034 = sum of:
    0.13339034 = product of:
      0.26678067 = sum of:
        0.26678067 = weight(_text_:1.0 in 3065) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.26678067 = score(doc=3065,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.32222155 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.5697527 = idf(docFreq=61, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042566985 = queryNorm
            0.8279417 = fieldWeight in 3065, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              7.5697527 = idf(docFreq=61, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3065)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

OpenURL was originally developed to enable link resolution of citation information in a distributed interoperable way. The initial standard (version 0.1) has been effectively subsumed as an application (named the San Antonio Level 1 profile) of a much more general framework called OpenURL 1.0. We used the framework to create WikiD (Wiki/Data), an application that has little to do with citation link resolvers, but is instead a set of general purpose services for managing arbitrary collections of items. The model for this application is a wiki engine generalized to manage multiple collections of XML records. This article describes WikiD and how it can serve as an example for applications that can be built on the foundation of the OpenURL framework.

0.05389783 = product of:
  0.10779566 = sum of:
    0.10779566 = product of:
      0.21559133 = sum of:
        0.21559133 = weight(_text_:1.0 in 3057) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.21559133 = score(doc=3057,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32222155 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.5697527 = idf(docFreq=61, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042566985 = queryNorm
            0.66907793 = fieldWeight in 3057, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.5697527 = idf(docFreq=61, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3057)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.042254787 = product of:
  0.084509574 = sum of:
    0.084509574 = product of:
      0.3380383 = sum of:
        0.3380383 = weight(_text_:3a in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.3380383 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.36088338 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042566985 = 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)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

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

0.040423375 = product of:
  0.08084675 = sum of:
    0.08084675 = product of:
      0.1616935 = sum of:
        0.1616935 = weight(_text_:1.0 in 1152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1616935 = score(doc=1152,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32222155 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.5697527 = idf(docFreq=61, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042566985 = queryNorm
            0.50180846 = fieldWeight in 1152, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.5697527 = idf(docFreq=61, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1152)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Encoded Archival Description (EAD) is an emerging standard used internationally in an increasing number of archives and manuscripts libraries to encode data describing corporate records and personal papers. The individual descriptions are variously called finding aids, guides, handlists, or catalogs. While archival description shares many objectives with bibliographic description, it differs from it in several essential ways. From its inception, EAD was based on SGML, and, with the release of EAD version 1.0 in 1998, it is also compliant with XML. EAD was, and continues to be, developed by the archival community. While development was initiated in the United States, international interest and contribution are increasing. EAD is currently administered and maintained jointly by the Society of American Archivists and the United States Library of Congress. Developers are currently exploring ways to internationalize the administration and maintenance of EAD to reflect and represent the expanding base of users.

0.040423375 = product of:
  0.08084675 = sum of:
    0.08084675 = product of:
      0.1616935 = sum of:
        0.1616935 = weight(_text_:1.0 in 1259) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1616935 = score(doc=1259,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32222155 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.5697527 = idf(docFreq=61, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042566985 = queryNorm
            0.50180846 = fieldWeight in 1259, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.5697527 = idf(docFreq=61, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1259)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Film, videotape and multimedia archive systems must address the issues of editing, authoring and searching at the media (i.e. tape) or sub media (i.e. scene) level in addition to the traditional inventory management capabilities associated with the physical media. This paper describes a prototype of a database design for the storage, search and retrieval of multimedia and its related information. It also provides a process by which legacy data can be imported to this schema. The Continuous Media Index, or Comix system is the name of the prototype. An implementation of such a digital library solution incorporates multimedia objects, hierarchical relationships and timecode in addition to traditional attribute data. Present video and multimedia archive systems are easily migrated to this architecture. Comix was implemented for a videotape archiving system. It was written for, and implemented using IBM Digital Library version 1.0. A derivative of Comix is currently in development for customer specific applications. Principles of the Comix design as well as the importation methods are not specific to the underlying systems used.

0.040423375 = product of:
  0.08084675 = sum of:
    0.08084675 = product of:
      0.1616935 = sum of:
        0.1616935 = weight(_text_:1.0 in 1057) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1616935 = score(doc=1057,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32222155 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.5697527 = idf(docFreq=61, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042566985 = queryNorm
            0.50180846 = fieldWeight in 1057, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.5697527 = idf(docFreq=61, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1057)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Issue

Revision: 1.0 as of 8th February 2013.

0.033803828 = product of:
  0.067607656 = sum of:
    0.067607656 = product of:
      0.27043062 = sum of:
        0.27043062 = weight(_text_:3a in 230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.27043062 = score(doc=230,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.36088338 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042566985 = 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)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

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

0.033686142 = product of:
  0.067372285 = sum of:
    0.067372285 = product of:
      0.13474457 = sum of:
        0.13474457 = weight(_text_:1.0 in 3287) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13474457 = score(doc=3287,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32222155 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.5697527 = idf(docFreq=61, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042566985 = queryNorm
            0.4181737 = fieldWeight in 3287, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.5697527 = idf(docFreq=61, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3287)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In einer empirischen Untersuchung wurde eine mittels Macromedia Director 6.0 entwickelte Lernsoftware zum Thema "Routineeingriffe in der Kinderchirurgie" evaluiert. Das multimediale Lernprogramm wurde an einer Stichprobe von 121 Medizinstudenten hinsichtlich gestalterischer Merkmale, motivationalen Effekten, Einstellungen und Maßen des Wissenserwerbes untersucht. Es wurden 121 Medizinstudenten randomisiert (medianes Alter 24; Spannweite: R=21-33) in 2 Gruppen aufgeteilt. Diese haben sich über 90 Minuten entweder mit dem Lernprogramm (CBT: n=71) oder in einem Seminar (Kurs: n=50) auf den Lernstoff vorbereitet. Eine Woche nach der Lernphase wurde mittels MC-Fragen ein Wissenstest durchgeführt. Nach einem zusätzlichen Bed-Side-Teaching für beide Gruppen wurden die Studenten durch den Dozenten geprüft. Hierbei wurde der klinische Umgang, der Problemzugang und die chirurgische Entscheidungsfindung evaluiert. Bezüglich des Wissenstestes zeigte sich zwischen beiden Gruppen ein statistisch signifikanter Unterschied zugunsten der CBT-Bedingung (P < 0.001) (CBT: Median=5; R=2.67 - 9.2 Punkte von 10 vs. Kurs: Median=3.16; R=1.0-7.0 Punkte). Beim Vergleich der beiden Gruppen hinsichtlich der evaluierten Faktoren wie klinischem Umgang, Angehen von Problemen und chirurgischer Entscheidungsfindung zeigte die CBT-Gruppe ein im Durchschnitt um 25% besseres Ergebnis gegenüber der Kontrollgruppe. Aufgrund der durchgeführten Untersuchung kann festgestellt werden, daß Lehr-Lernmodule in der Chirurgie zur signifikanten Steigerung der Vermittlung medizinischen Wissens und zur verbesserten Ausbildung des deduktiven Denkens führen.

0.026948916 = product of:
  0.05389783 = sum of:
    0.05389783 = product of:
      0.10779566 = sum of:
        0.10779566 = weight(_text_:1.0 in 2816) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10779566 = score(doc=2816,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32222155 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.5697527 = idf(docFreq=61, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042566985 = queryNorm
            0.33453897 = fieldWeight in 2816, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.5697527 = idf(docFreq=61, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2816)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The European Commission's goal for Europeana is to make European information resources easier to use in an online environment. It will build on Europe's rich heritage, combining multicultural and multilingual environments with technological advances and new business models. The Europeana prototype is the result of a 2-year project that began in July 2007. Europeana.eu went live on 20 November 2008, launched by Viviane Reding, European Commissioner for Information Society and Media. Europeana.eu is about ideas and inspiration. It links the user to 2 million digital items: images, text, sounds and videos. Europeana is a Thematic Network funded by the European Commission under the eContentplus programme, as part of the i2010 policy. Originally known as the European digital library network - EDLnet - it is a partnership of 100 representatives of heritage and knowledge organisations and IT experts from throughout Europe. They contribute to the work packages that are solving the technical and usability issues. The project is run by a core team based in the national library of the Netherlands, the Koninklijke Bibliotheek. It builds on the project management and technical expertise developed by The European Library, which is a service of the Conference of European National Librarians. Content is added via so called aggregators, national or domain specific portals aggegrating digital content and channelling it to Europeana. Most of these portals are being developed in the framework of EU funded projects, e.g. European Film Gateway, Athena and EuropeanaLocal. Overseeing the project is the EDL Foundation, which includes key European cultural heritage associations from the four domains. The Foundation's statutes commit members to: * providing access to Europe's cultural and scientific heritage through a cross-domain portal; * co-operating in the delivery and sustainability of the joint portal; * stimulating initiatives to bring together existing digital content; * supporting digitisation of Europe's cultural and scientific heritage. Europeana.eu is a prototype. Europeana Version 1.0 is being developed and will be launched in 2010 with links to over 6 million digital objects.

0.023580302 = product of:
  0.047160603 = sum of:
    0.047160603 = product of:
      0.094321206 = sum of:
        0.094321206 = weight(_text_:1.0 in 2362) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.094321206 = score(doc=2362,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32222155 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.5697527 = idf(docFreq=61, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042566985 = queryNorm
            0.2927216 = fieldWeight in 2362, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.5697527 = idf(docFreq=61, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2362)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The paper analysed here is a kind of position paper. In order to get a better under-standing of the reported work I used the retrieval interface of the thesaurus, the so-called NCI DTS Browser accessible via the Web3, and I perused the cited OWL file4 with numerous "Find" and "Find next" string searches. In addition the file was im-ported into Protégé 2000, Release 2.0, with OWL Plugin 1.0 and Racer Plugin 1.7.14. At the end of the paper's introduction the authors say: "In the following sections, this paper will describe the terminology development process at NCI, and the issues associated with converting a description logic based nomenclature to a semantically rich OWL ontology." While I will not deal with the first part, i.e. the terminology development process at NCI, I do not see the thesaurus as a description logic based nomenclature, or its cur-rent state and conversion already result in a "rich" OWL ontology. What does "rich" mean here? According to my view there is a great quantity of concepts and links but a very poor description logic structure which enables inferences. And what does the fol-lowing really mean, which is said a few lines previously: "Although editors have defined a number of named ontologic relations to support the description-logic based structure of the Thesaurus, additional relation-ships are considered for inclusion as required to support dependent applications."

0.023068957 = product of:
  0.046137914 = sum of:
    0.046137914 = product of:
      0.09227583 = sum of:
        0.09227583 = weight(_text_:22 in 5449) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09227583 = score(doc=5449,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14906234 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042566985 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 2.1997 19:26:34

0.023068957 = product of:
  0.046137914 = sum of:
    0.046137914 = product of:
      0.09227583 = sum of:
        0.09227583 = weight(_text_:22 in 5837) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09227583 = score(doc=5837,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14906234 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042566985 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

30.11.1996 13:22:37

0.023068957 = product of:
  0.046137914 = sum of:
    0.046137914 = product of:
      0.09227583 = sum of:
        0.09227583 = weight(_text_:22 in 4085) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09227583 = score(doc=4085,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14906234 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042566985 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

7.11.1999 18:22:39

0.022567892 = product of:
  0.045135785 = sum of:
    0.045135785 = product of:
      0.09027157 = sum of:
        0.09027157 = weight(_text_:22 in 1936) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09027157 = score(doc=1936,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.14906234 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042566985 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

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