Search (1193 results, page 1 of 60)

  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  • × type_ss:"a"
  1. Becker, H.-G.; Lemanski, T.; Ziebarth, T.: Web 1.0 - 4.0 : Zwischen Reparaturbetrieb und ferner Vision (2008) 0.17 
    0.17098251 = product of:
  0.34196502 = sum of:
    0.34196502 = sum of:
      0.29402736 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 1940) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.29402736 = score(doc=1940,freq=10.0), product of:
          0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          1.0029888 = fieldWeight in 1940, product of:
            3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
              10.0 = termFreq=10.0
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1940)
      0.047937647 = weight(_text_:22 in 1940) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.047937647 = score(doc=1940,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1940, 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=1940)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Die 10. InetBib-Tagung fand vom 9. bis 11. April in den Räumlichkeiten der neuen Universität in Würzburg und damit zum ersten Mal in Bayern statt. Über 450 Teilnehmer und rund 40 Vorträge bedeuteten eine neue Rekordbeteiligung. InetBib 2.0 - der Name der Tagung war Programm: Diskutiert wurden die Web-2.0-Technologien und deren Einsatz in Bibliotheken sowie ihr Mehrwert für Nutzer und Mitarbeiter. Neben diesen Themen, die auch das Second Life, die Bibliothek 2.0, den Katalog 2.0 sowie den Bibliothekar 2.0 berührten, wurden ebenfalls eher praktische Fragen aus dem Alltag behandelt, wie zum Beispiel das neue Urheberrecht und seine Konsequenzen für den Kopien­versand, die Anforderungen virtueller Studiengänge an Bibliotheken und die Möglichkeiten, Benutzern eBooks anzubieten.
    Date
    22. 6.2008 17:20:09
  2. Blumauer, A.; Pellegrini, T.: Semantic Web Revisited : Eine kurze Einführung in das Social Semantic Web (2009) 0.16 
    0.15546185 = product of:
  0.3109237 = sum of:
    0.3109237 = sum of:
      0.26298603 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 4855) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.26298603 = score(doc=4855,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.8971004 = fieldWeight in 4855, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4855)
      0.047937647 = weight(_text_:22 in 4855) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.047937647 = score(doc=4855,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4855, 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=4855)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Während in den vergangenen Monaten Themen wie Web 2.0 und Social Software ein erstaunliches Konjunkturhoch erlebt haben, vollzieht sich weitgehend abseits der öffentlichen Wahrnehmung eine technologische Komplementärinnovation. Die wachsende Adaption semantischer Technologien zu Zwecken der strukturierten Erschließung von "Web 2.0 Content", aber auch der Einsatz von Social Software zur kollaborativen Anreicherung von Web Content mit maschinenlesbaren Metadaten sind Ausdruck eines Trends in Richtung "Social Semantic Web". Bezeichnendes Merkmal dieser Entwicklung ist die voranschreitende Konvergenz zwischen Social Software und Semantic Web Technologien. Dieser Beitrag hat das Ziel ein allgemeines Bewusstsein und Verständnis dieser Entwicklung zu schaffen und nähert sich dem Phänomen aus einer nichttechnischen Perspektive.
    Object
    Web 2.0
    Pages
    S.3-22
    Source
    Social Semantic Web: Web 2.0, was nun? Hrsg.: A. Blumauer u. T. Pellegrini
  3. ak: ¬Der Umwelt zuliebe ... (2000) 0.13 
    0.12816477 = product of:
  0.25632954 = sum of:
    0.25632954 = sum of:
      0.18784717 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 4745) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.18784717 = score(doc=4745,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.640786 = fieldWeight in 4745, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4745)
      0.068482354 = weight(_text_:22 in 4745) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.068482354 = score(doc=4745,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4745, 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=4745)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Unter dem Titel Ökobase präsentiert die Fa. Clemes Hölter 2 neue Umwelt CD-ROMs, die in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Umweltbundesamt entwickelt worden sind. Der Umweltatlas 2.0 ist eher für Firmen und Personen vom Fach interessant, die CD 'Multimedia 8.0' hingegen ist für das breite Publikum konzoiert
    Source
    CD-Info. 2000, H.6, S.22
  4. Sauermann, L.; Kiesel, M.; Schumacher, K.; Bernardi, A.: Semantic Desktop (2009) 0.12 
    0.11694843 = product of:
  0.23389687 = sum of:
    0.23389687 = sum of:
      0.18595922 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 2416) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.18595922 = score(doc=2416,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.6343458 = fieldWeight in 2416, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2416)
      0.047937647 = weight(_text_:22 in 2416) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.047937647 = score(doc=2416,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2416, 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=2416)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    3. 1.2012 16:00:22
    Object
    Web 2.0
    Source
    Social Semantic Web: Web 2.0, was nun? Hrsg.: A. Blumauer u. T. Pellegrini
  5. Shoffner, M.; Greenberg, J.; Kramer-Duffield, J.; Woodbury, D.: Web 2.0 semantic systems : collaborative learning in science (2008) 0.11 
    0.11309586 = product of:
  0.22619171 = sum of:
    0.22619171 = sum of:
      0.19879878 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 2661) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.19879878 = score(doc=2661,freq=14.0), product of:
          0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.6781442 = fieldWeight in 2661, product of:
            3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
              14.0 = termFreq=14.0
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2661)
      0.02739294 = weight(_text_:22 in 2661) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02739294 = score(doc=2661,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2661, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2661)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The basic goal of education within a discipline is to transform a novice into an expert. This entails moving the novice toward the "semantic space" that the expert inhabits-the space of concepts, meanings, vocabularies, and other intellectual constructs that comprise the discipline. Metadata is significant to this goal in digitally mediated education environments. Encoding the experts' semantic space not only enables the sharing of semantics among discipline scientists, but also creates an environment that bridges the semantic gap between the common vocabulary of the novice and the granular descriptive language of the seasoned scientist (Greenberg, et al, 2005). Developments underlying the Semantic Web, where vocabularies are formalized in the Web Ontology Language (OWL), and Web 2.0 approaches of user-generated folksonomies provide an infrastructure for linking vocabulary systems and promoting group learning via metadata literacy. Group learning is a pedagogical approach to teaching that harnesses the phenomenon of "collective intelligence" to increase learning by means of collaboration. Learning a new semantic system can be daunting for a novice, and yet it is integral to advance one's knowledge in a discipline and retain interest. These ideas are key to the "BOT 2.0: Botany through Web 2.0, the Memex and Social Learning" project (Bot 2.0).72 Bot 2.0 is a collaboration involving the North Carolina Botanical Garden, the UNC SILS Metadata Research center, and the Renaissance Computing Institute (RENCI). Bot 2.0 presents a curriculum utilizing a memex as a way for students to link and share digital information, working asynchronously in an environment beyond the traditional classroom. Our conception of a memex is not a centralized black box but rather a flexible, distributed framework that uses the most salient and easiest-to-use collaborative platforms (e.g., Facebook, Flickr, wiki and blog technology) for personal information management. By meeting students "where they live" digitally, we hope to attract students to the study of botanical science. A key aspect is to teach students scientific terminology and about the value of metadata, an inherent function in several of the technologies and in the instructional approach we are utilizing. This poster will report on a study examining the value of both folksonomies and taxonomies for post-secondary college students learning plant identification. Our data is drawn from a curriculum involving a virtual independent learning portion and a "BotCamp" weekend at UNC, where students work with digital plan specimens that they have captured. Results provide some insight into the importance of collaboration and shared vocabulary for gaining confidence and for student progression from novice to expert in botany.
    Source
    Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
  6. Hahn, U.; Schulze, M.: Katalogerweiterungen, Mashups und Elemente der Bibliothek 2.0" in der Praxis : der Katalog der Universitätsbibliothek der Helmut-Schmidt-Universität (IHSU) Universität der Bundeswehr Hamburg (2009) 0.11 
    0.11309586 = product of:
  0.22619171 = sum of:
    0.22619171 = sum of:
      0.19879878 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 2672) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.19879878 = score(doc=2672,freq=14.0), product of:
          0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.6781442 = fieldWeight in 2672, product of:
            3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
              14.0 = termFreq=14.0
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2672)
      0.02739294 = weight(_text_:22 in 2672) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02739294 = score(doc=2672,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2672, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2672)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Die verschiedenen unter dem Schlagwort "Bibliothek 2.0" zusammengefassten neuen Dienste und Komponenten wie etwa Wikis, Tagging-Systeme und Blogs sind seit einiger Zeit in aller Munde und dringen über Fortbildungsveranstaltungen, Konferenzen und Publikationsorgane immer mehr in das deutschsprachige Bibliothekswesen ein. Darüber hinaus gibt es öffentlich geförderte Projekte zu bibliothekarischen 2.0-Themen und sogar ein Projekt, welches sich explizit einen 2.0-Katalog zum Ziel gesetzt hat. In diesem Beitrag soll es nun nicht um die Vorstellung eines weiteren Projekts im Dienste des Themas "Bibliothek 2.0" gehen, ebenso hat dieser Beitrag nicht den Anspruch, die Diskussion über die möglichen Vor- oder Nachteile dieser Thematik auf theoretischer Ebene voranzubringen. Vielmehr wird hier ganz praktisch aus Sicht einer kleinen Universitätsbibliothek, der Bibliothek der Helmut-SchmidtUniversität (HSU) - Universität der Bundeswehr Hamburg, aufgezeigt, wie das Thema "Web/Bibliothek 2.0" durchaus neben und in Unterstützung von weiteren nutzerorientierten Servicedienstleistungen auch in kleinen Schritten positive Auswirkungen für die Nutzerinnen und Nutzer haben kann. Der Focus wird dabei auf dem zentralen Arbeits- und Rechercheinstrument der Bibliotheksnutzer liegen, dem Bibliothekskatalog. Speziell wird es darum gehen, wie auf relativ einfache Art und Weise durch Anwendung verschiedener Elemente anderer Dienste und Anbieter sowie das Aufgreifen von Schnittstellen und wenig aufwendigen Verbesserungen, Mehrwert für die Nutzerinnen und Nutzer zu erzielen ist. Ein zentraler Begriff bei fast allen Überlegungen, die im Zusammenhang mit der Verbesserung und Anreicherung des Kataloges stehen, war und ist das Thema "Mash-up". Unter Mashups - ein Begriff, der gerade im Zusammenhang mit dem Thema "Web 2.0" im deutschsprachigen Raum eingeführt und adaptiert wurde - wird das Verfahren bezeichnet, Web-Inhalte neu zu kombinieren. Dabei nutzt man bei und für Mashups offene "APIs" (Application Programming Interfaces, also offene Programmierschnittstellen), die von anderen Web-Anwendungen zur Verfügung gestellt werden.
    Date
    22. 2.2009 19:40:38
  7. Wusteman, J.: Whither HTML? (2004) 0.10 
    0.102531806 = product of:
  0.20506361 = sum of:
    0.20506361 = sum of:
      0.15027773 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 1001) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.15027773 = score(doc=1001,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.5126288 = fieldWeight in 1001, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1001)
      0.05478588 = weight(_text_:22 in 1001) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05478588 = score(doc=1001,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1001, 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=1001)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    HTML has reinvented itself as an XML application. The working draft of the latest version, XHTML 2.0, is causing controversy due to its lack of backward compatibility and the deprecation - and in some cases disappearance - of some popular tags. But is this commotion distracting us from the big picture of what XHTML has to offer? Where is HTML going? And is it taking the Web community with it?
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1, S.99-105
  8. Münnich, K.; Reichelt, D.: XML-Helfer : Acht XML-Werkzeuge im Vergleich (2003) 0.10 
    0.102531806 = product of:
  0.20506361 = sum of:
    0.20506361 = sum of:
      0.15027773 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 1890) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.15027773 = score(doc=1890,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.5126288 = fieldWeight in 1890, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1890)
      0.05478588 = weight(_text_:22 in 1890) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05478588 = score(doc=1890,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1890, 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=1890)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    25.10.2003 18:22:41
    Object
    Oxygen XML Editor 2.0
  9. Reiß, M.; Steffens, D.: Neue Medien im Dienste des Change Managements : Empirische Modellierung des Blending konventioneller und web-basierter Kommunikationsmedien (2008) 0.10 
    0.102531806 = product of:
  0.20506361 = sum of:
    0.20506361 = sum of:
      0.15027773 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 766) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.15027773 = score(doc=766,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.5126288 = fieldWeight in 766, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=766)
      0.05478588 = weight(_text_:22 in 766) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05478588 = score(doc=766,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 766, 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=766)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Dass sich Kommunikation über einen Me­dienmix vollzieht, stellt schon seit sehr langer Zeit den Regelfall dar. In letzter Zeit wird verstärkt für Mischungen aus gegensätzlichen Medien plädiert, allen voran aus konventionellen und elektro­nischen Medien. Der Beitrag behandelt die Frage, nach welchen Mustern derar­tige hybride Kommunikationsmixe kon­struiert sind und wie deren Effektivität und Effizienz zu beurteilen sind. Die Beantwortung dieser Fragen erfolgt auf der Basis einer Expertenbefragung zum Einsatz von Web-2.0-Medien in Verände­rungsprozessen.
    Date
    22. 6.2008 16:55:24
  10. Schneider, R.: OPACs, Benutzer und das Web (2009) 0.10 
    0.102531806 = product of:
  0.20506361 = sum of:
    0.20506361 = sum of:
      0.15027773 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 2905) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.15027773 = score(doc=2905,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.5126288 = fieldWeight in 2905, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2905)
      0.05478588 = weight(_text_:22 in 2905) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05478588 = score(doc=2905,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2905, 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=2905)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Der Artikel betrachtet anhand einer Studie zum Benutzerverhalten bei der Online-Katalogrecherche den gegenwärtigen Stellenwert und das zukünftige Potential der Web-OPACs. Dabei werden zunächst die Ergebnisse einer quantitativen Logfile-Analyse sowie qualitativer Benutzertests erörtert, bevor aktuelle Entwicklungen der Webtechnologie, die unter den Schlagworten Web 2.0 und Web 3.0 propagiert werden, im Zusammenhang mit der Online-Recherche und der Entwicklung neuartiger Suchverfahren kurz diskutiert werden.
    Date
    22. 2.2009 18:50:43
  11. Hotho, A.; Bloehdorn, S.: Data Mining 2004 : Text classification by boosting weak learners based on terms and concepts (2004) 0.10 
    0.10082457 = sum of:
  0.080279864 = product of:
    0.24083959 = sum of:
      0.24083959 = weight(_text_:3a in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.24083959 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.42852643 = queryWeight, product of:
            8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 562, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=562)
    0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.020544706 = product of:
    0.04108941 = sum of:
      0.04108941 = weight(_text_:22 in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04108941 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 562, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=562)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Content
    Vgl.: http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CEAQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fciteseerx.ist.psu.edu%2Fviewdoc%2Fdownload%3Fdoi%3D10.1.1.91.4940%26rep%3Drep1%26type%3Dpdf&ei=dOXrUMeIDYHDtQahsIGACg&usg=AFQjCNHFWVh6gNPvnOrOS9R3rkrXCNVD-A&sig2=5I2F5evRfMnsttSgFF9g7Q&bvm=bv.1357316858,d.Yms.
    Date
    8. 1.2013 10:22:32
  12. Degkwitz, A.: Bologna, University 2.0 : Akademisches Leben als Web-Version? (2008) 0.10 
    0.09964354 = product of:
  0.19928709 = sum of:
    0.19928709 = sum of:
      0.13149302 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 1423) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.13149302 = score(doc=1423,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.4485502 = fieldWeight in 1423, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1423)
      0.06779408 = weight(_text_:22 in 1423) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06779408 = score(doc=1423,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.38301262 = fieldWeight in 1423, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1423)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    22. 2.2008 13:28:00
    Source
    Zeitschrift für Bibliothekswesen und Bibliographie. 55(2008) H.1, S.18-22
  13. Schmolling, R.: Neue Kommunikationsformen mit den Bibliotheksbenutzern 2.0 der Universität : Integration von Bibliotheksinformationen und Schulungsangeboten in das Kursmanagementsystem Studip (2007) 0.10 
    0.09846081 = product of:
  0.19692162 = sum of:
    0.19692162 = sum of:
      0.16268043 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 1279) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.16268043 = score(doc=1279,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.554937 = fieldWeight in 1279, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1279)
      0.034241177 = weight(_text_:22 in 1279) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034241177 = score(doc=1279,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1279, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1279)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Die Literatur- und Informationsbeschaffung der aktuellen Studierendengeneration erfolgt heute auf anderen Wegen als noch vor 10 Jahren. Ob im privaten Umfeld MyTube für Videoangebote im Internet, Google Earth für geographische Orientierungen, oder Wikipedia anstelle des Brockhaus, der Informationseinstieg läuft nicht mehr in Form der Konsultation eines Lehrbuchs oder Nachschlagewerkes aus der Bibliothek: "Benutzer warten heute nicht mehr darauf, die Grundsätze des Umgangs mit Informationen in der Bibliothek neu erklärt zu bekommen; hier sind neue, weniger "verschulte" Kommunikationswege gefragt." Unaufhaltsam ergreift der Web 2.0-Hype auch vom Studienalltag Besitz und führt zum Umbau etablierter Informations- und Kommunikationswege. Die neue Internetgemeinde setzt anstelle von medialer Berieselung auf aktives Mitmachen. Zum "Social Networking" gehört, dass "Siegfried Sorglos" seine Urlaubsfotos, seine Handy-Nummer, seine Hobbies für Freunde ins Netz stellt. Der Datenschutz zur Wahrung der Privatsphäre hat ausgedient. Informationen, auch über Persönliches, sind Public Domain. Man gruschelt Freunde und kommuniziert über SMS, ICQ oder Skype Termine und Verabredungen.
    700000 Studierende aus knapp 2000 Hochschulen in Deutschland zählte die 2005 gegründete Internetplattform StudiVZ im Oktober 2006, eine Nachnutzung des amerikanischen Facebook. StudiVZ lebt von der Vernetzung, man verlinkt auf der eigenen Homepage alle Freunde mit ebenfalls eigenem Auftritt in StudiVZ. Wer eine Reise ins Ausland plant, ermittelt in der Gemeinde die zu besuchenden In-Kneipen, sucht Mitfahrgelegenheiten, tauscht sich über den Impact-Faktor eigener Hochschulprofessoren aus. Zu unterschiedlichsten Themen gibt es derzeit 50.000 Foren. Die "Bibliothekare 2.0" waren bereits aktiv, zur Themengruppe "Bibliothek" gibt es im StudiVZ allein 15 Chatgruppen mit animierenden Titeln wie "Zweitwohnsitz Uni-Bibliothek", 52 Mitglieder, "Bibliotheksconnection Jena", 7 Mitglieder sowie die bibliothekarische Unterwelt: "Manager der leisesten Clubs der Welt: die Bibliothekare, 214 Mitglieder."
    Source
    Bibliotheksdienst. 41(2007) H.1, S.22-33
  14. Ziegler, C.: Smartes Chaos : Web 2.0 versus Semantic Web (2006) 0.09 
    0.09392358 = product of:
  0.18784717 = sum of:
    0.18784717 = product of:
      0.37569433 = sum of:
        0.37569433 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 4868) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.37569433 = score(doc=4868,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050545633 = queryNorm
            1.281572 = fieldWeight in 4868, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4868)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Web 2.0 und Semantic Web schicken sich gleichermaßen an, dem klassischen WWW neuen Lebensatem einzuhauchen. Dabei könnte Web 2.0 sich zu genau dem entwickeln, was das Semantic Web sein wollte, nie wurde und womöglich niemals sein kann
    Object
    Web 2.0
  15. Bettel, S.: Warum Web 2.0? Oder : Was vom Web 2.0 wirklich bleiben wird (2009) 0.09 
    0.09202594 = product of:
  0.18405189 = sum of:
    0.18405189 = product of:
      0.36810377 = sum of:
        0.36810377 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 4856) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.36810377 = score(doc=4856,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050545633 = queryNorm
            1.255679 = fieldWeight in 4856, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4856)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Dieser Beitrag diskutiert die Entwicklungsgeschichte und den Facettenreichtum eines Begriffes, der gleichsam für technologische Innovation, soziale Modernisierung und eine schlaue Marketingstrategie steht. Es zeigt sich, dass die Verortung des Phänomens Web 2.0, gerade aufgrund der Polemik und Polarisierung, die der Begriff hervorgerufen hat, schwieriger ist, als man vermuten mag. Doch eines ist gewiss: Seit das Web 2.0 in unser Bewusstsein gelangt ist, ist das Internet wieder "in".
    Object
    Web 2.0
    Source
    Social Semantic Web: Web 2.0, was nun? Hrsg.: A. Blumauer u. T. Pellegrini
  16. Warr, W.A.: Social software : fun and games, or business tools? (2009) 0.09 
    0.08971533 = product of:
  0.17943066 = sum of:
    0.17943066 = sum of:
      0.13149302 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 3663) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.13149302 = score(doc=3663,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.4485502 = fieldWeight in 3663, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3663)
      0.047937647 = weight(_text_:22 in 3663) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.047937647 = score(doc=3663,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3663, 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=3663)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    This is the era of social networking, collective intelligence, participation, collaborative creation, and borderless distribution. Every day we are bombarded with more publicity about collaborative environments, news feeds, blogs, wikis, podcasting, webcasting, folksonomies, social bookmarking, social citations, collaborative filtering, recommender systems, media sharing, massive multiplayer online games, virtual worlds, and mash-ups. This sort of anarchic environment appeals to the digital natives, but which of these so-called 'Web 2.0' technologies are going to have a real business impact? This paper addresses the impact that issues such as quality control, security, privacy and bandwidth may have on the implementation of social networking in hide-bound, large organizations.
    Date
    8. 7.2010 19:24:22
  17. Srinivasan, R.; Boast, R.; Becvar, K.M.; Furner, J.: Blobgects : digital museum catalogs and diverse user communities (2009) 0.08 
    0.0835346 = product of:
  0.1670692 = sum of:
    0.1670692 = sum of:
      0.13282801 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 2754) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.13282801 = score(doc=2754,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.45310414 = fieldWeight in 2754, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2754)
      0.034241177 = weight(_text_:22 in 2754) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034241177 = score(doc=2754,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2754, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2754)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    This article presents an exploratory study of Blobgects, an experimental interface for an online museum catalog that enables social tagging and blogging activity around a set of cultural heritage objects held by a preeminent museum of anthropology and archaeology. This study attempts to understand not just whether social tagging and commenting about these objects is useful but rather whose tags and voices matter in presenting different expert perspectives around digital museum objects. Based on an empirical comparison between two different user groups (Canadian Inuit high-school students and museum studies students in the United States), we found that merely adding the ability to tag and comment to the museum's catalog does not sufficiently allow users to learn about or engage with the objects represented by catalog entries. Rather, the specialist language of the catalog provides too little contextualization for users to enter into the sort of dialog that proponents of Web 2.0 technologies promise. Overall, we propose a more nuanced application of Web 2.0 technologies within museums - one which provides a contextual basis that gives users a starting point for engagement and permits users to make sense of objects in relation to their own needs, uses, and understandings.
    Date
    22. 3.2009 18:52:32
  18. Joint, N.: ¬The Web 2.0 challenge to libraries (2009) 0.08 
    0.07787733 = product of:
  0.15575466 = sum of:
    0.15575466 = product of:
      0.3115093 = sum of:
        0.3115093 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 2959) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.3115093 = score(doc=2959,freq=22.0), product of:
            0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050545633 = queryNorm
            1.0626235 = fieldWeight in 2959, product of:
              4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
                22.0 = termFreq=22.0
              5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2959)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to illustrate issues surrounding Web 2.0 technologies and their relevance to libraries by general discussion and examples from library practice. Design/methodology/approach - A broad narrative account of Web 2.0 developments combined with illustrations of how one library in particular reacted to these developments. Findings - It was found that all libraries need to evolve a Web 2.0 strategy to promote this aspect of their services, but that they will need to devise solutions to specific problems as part of this strategy. These include the range of Web 2.0 platforms that are on offer and the authentication and workload issues associated with this diversity. A single, unified library system-based approach to Web 2.0 is offered as a viable alternative to using disparate external services. Research limitations/implications - This paper does not resolve the difference between a multi-platform Web 2.0 strategy and the single, unified library system-based approach, although a preference for the systems-based approach is suggested. The relative strengths and weaknesses of these two approaches is worthy of further research. Practical implications - At the level of practice, this viewpoint article offers two alternative Web 2.0 strategies which can be applied quite readily in everyday library work. Originality/value - This paper tries to offer a clear range of options for librarians interested in pursuing Web 2.0 services, facilitating successful service enhancement in the working library.
    Footnote
    Beitrag in einem Special Issue: Web 2.0 and gaming in libraries
    Object
    Web 2.0
  19. Méndez, E.; López, L.M.; Siches, A.; Bravo, A.G.: DCMF: DC & Microformats, a good marriage (2008) 0.08 
    0.07689886 = product of:
  0.15379772 = sum of:
    0.15379772 = sum of:
      0.1127083 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 2634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.1127083 = score(doc=2634,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.3844716 = fieldWeight in 2634, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2634)
      0.04108941 = weight(_text_:22 in 2634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04108941 = score(doc=2634,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2634, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2634)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    This report introduces the Dublin Core Microformats (DCMF) project, a new way to use the DC element set within X/HTML. The DC microformats encode explicit semantic expressions in an X/HTML webpage, by using a specific list of terms for values of the attributes "rev" and "rel" for <a> and <link> elements, and "class" and "id" of other elements. Microformats can be easily processed by user agents and software, enabling a high level of interoperability. These characteristics are crucial for the growing number of social applications allowing users to participate in the Web 2.0 environment as information creators and consumers. This report reviews the origins of microformats; illustrates the coding of DC microformats using the Dublin Core Metadata Gen tool, and a Firefox extension for extraction and visualization; and discusses the benefits of creating Web services utilizing DC microformats.
    Source
    Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
  20. Linder, J.: ¬Die Usability von Rich Internet Applications (2009) 0.08 
    0.07513887 = product of:
  0.15027773 = sum of:
    0.15027773 = product of:
      0.30055547 = sum of:
        0.30055547 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 4859) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.30055547 = score(doc=4859,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050545633 = queryNorm
            1.0252576 = fieldWeight in 4859, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4859)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Interaktiven Services, die dem Themenkreis Web 2.0 zugeordnet werden, haftet unter anderem das Attribut an, besonders leicht bedienbar zu sein. Flickr, Youtube und Wikipedia gelten als Erfolgsprojekte dieser neuen Art von interaktiven Websites. Wodurch zeichnet sich nun eine Usability 2.0 (so es sie überhaupt geben sollte) aus? Was ist zu beachten, wenn so genannte Rich Internet Applications gestaltet werden?
    Object
    Web 2.0
    Source
    Social Semantic Web: Web 2.0, was nun? Hrsg.: A. Blumauer u. T. Pellegrini

Authors

Languages

Types

Themes