Search (752 results, page 1 of 38)

0.11694843 = product of:
  0.23389687 = sum of:
    0.23389687 = sum of:
      0.18595922 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 1517) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.18595922 = score(doc=1517,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.6343458 = fieldWeight in 1517, 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=1517)
      0.047937647 = weight(_text_:22 in 1517) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.047937647 = score(doc=1517,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1517, 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=1517)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

RSWK

Soziale Software / World Wide Web 2.0 / Kongress / Düsseldorf <2012>

Subject

Soziale Software / World Wide Web 2.0 / Kongress / Düsseldorf <2012>

0.11309586 = product of:
  0.22619171 = sum of:
    0.22619171 = sum of:
      0.19879878 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 4202) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.19879878 = score(doc=4202,freq=14.0), product of:
          0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.6781442 = fieldWeight in 4202, 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=4202)
      0.02739294 = weight(_text_:22 in 4202) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02739294 = score(doc=4202,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 4202, 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=4202)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - This paper is the final one in a series which has tried to give an overview of so-called transformational areas of digital library technology. The aim has been to assess how much real transformation these applications can bring about, in terms of creating genuine user benefit and also changing everyday library practice. Design/methodology/approach - The paper provides a summary of some of the legal and ethical issues associated with web 2.0 applications in libraries, associated with a brief retrospective view of some relevant literature. Findings - Although web 2.0 innovations have had a massive impact on the larger World Wide Web, the practical impact on library service delivery has been limited to date. What probably can be termed transformational in the effect of web 2.0 developments on library and information work is their effect on some underlying principles of professional practice. Research limitations/implications - The legal and ethical challenges of incorporating web 2.0 platforms into mainstream institutional service delivery need to be subject to further research, so that the risks associated with these innovations are better understood at the strategic and policy-making level. Practical implications - This paper makes some recommendations about new principles of library and information practice which will help practitioners make better sense of these innovations in their overall information environment. Social implications - The paper puts in context some of the more problematic social impacts of web 2.0 innovations, without denying the undeniable positive contribution of social networking to the sphere of human interactivity. Originality/value - This paper raises some cautionary points about web 2.0 applications without adopting a precautionary approach of total prohibition. However, none of the suggestions or analysis in this piece should be considered to constitute legal advice. If such advice is required, the reader should consult appropriate legal professionals.

Date

22. 1.2011 17:54:04

0.11104417 = product of:
  0.22208834 = sum of:
    0.22208834 = sum of:
      0.18784717 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 3733) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.18784717 = score(doc=3733,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.640786 = fieldWeight in 3733, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3733)
      0.034241177 = weight(_text_:22 in 3733) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034241177 = score(doc=3733,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3733, 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=3733)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The focus of the present research has been the development and the application to Virtual Archaeology of a Web-Based framework for Learning Objects indexing and retrieval. The paper presents the main outcomes of a experimentation carried out by an interdisciplinary group of Federico II University of Naples. Our equipe is composed by researchers both in ICT and in Humanities disciplines, in particular in the domain of Virtual Archaeology and Cultural Heritage Informatics in order to develop specific ICT methodological approaches to Virtual Archaeology. The methodological background is the progressive diffusion of Web 2.0 technologies and the attempt to analyze their impact and perspectives in the Cultural Heritage field. In particular, we approached the specific requirements of the so called Learning 2.0, and the possibility to improve the automation of modular courseware generation in Virtual Archaeology Didactics. The developed framework was called SEMANTICA, and it was applied to Virtual Archaeology Domain Ontologies in order to generate a didactic course in a semi-automated way. The main results of this test and the first students feedback on the course fruition will be presented and discussed..

Object

ARCHAEOLOGY 2.0

Source

Wissensspeicher in digitalen Räumen: Nachhaltigkeit - Verfügbarkeit - semantische Interoperabilität. Proceedings der 11. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation, Konstanz, 20. bis 22. Februar 2008. Hrsg.: J. Sieglerschmidt u. H.P.Ohly

0.09297961 = product of:
  0.18595922 = sum of:
    0.18595922 = product of:
      0.37191844 = sum of:
        0.37191844 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 4848) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.37191844 = score(doc=4848,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050545633 = queryNorm
            1.2686917 = fieldWeight in 4848, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4848)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In diesem Artikel geht es darum, was Web 2.0 für die Wissenschaft bedeutet und welchen Nutzen Web 2.0-Dienste für Wissenschaftler haben. Im Rahmen dieses Themas wird eine Studie vorgestellt, bei der Wissenschaftler unterschiedlicher Fachbereiche unter anderem gefragt wurden, welche Web 2.0-Dienste sie kennen und warum sie Web 2.0-Dienste nutzen. Nach einer kurzen Einleitung zu Web 2.0 und dem bisherigen Forschungsstand folgen die Ergebnisse der Studie, die zeigen werden, dass Web 2.0-Dienste bekannt sind und für private Zwecke und zur Unterhaltung genutzt werden, sie sich allerdings noch nicht als Werkzeuge für die Wissenschaft etabliert haben.

Object

Web 2.0

0.0835346 = product of:
  0.1670692 = sum of:
    0.1670692 = sum of:
      0.13282801 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 2934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.13282801 = score(doc=2934,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.45310414 = fieldWeight in 2934, 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=2934)
      0.034241177 = weight(_text_:22 in 2934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034241177 = score(doc=2934,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2934, 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=2934)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Tags generated by domain experts reaching a consensus under social influence reflect the core concepts of the tagged resource. Such tags can act as navigational cues that enable users to discover meaningful and relevant information in a Web 2.0 environment. This is particularly critical for nonexperts for understanding formal academic or scientific resources, also known as hard content. The goal of this study was to develop a novel one-bit comparison (OBC) metric and to assess in what circumstances a set of tags describing a hard-content resource is mature and representative. We compared OBC with the conventional Shannon entropy approach to determine performance when distinguishing tags generated by domain experts and nonexperts in the early and later stages under social influence. The results indicated that OBC can accurately distinguish mature tags generated by a strong expert consensus from other tags, and outperform Shannon entropy. The findings support tag-based learning, and provide insights and tools for the design of applications involving tags, such as tag recommendation and tag-based organization.

Date

7. 5.2016 20:13:22

0.0835346 = product of:
  0.1670692 = sum of:
    0.1670692 = sum of:
      0.13282801 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 3343) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.13282801 = score(doc=3343,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.45310414 = fieldWeight in 3343, 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=3343)
      0.034241177 = weight(_text_:22 in 3343) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034241177 = score(doc=3343,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3343, 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=3343)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

16.11.2017 13:04:22

Object

Web 2.0

0.080279864 = product of:
  0.16055973 = sum of:
    0.16055973 = product of:
      0.48167917 = sum of:
        0.48167917 = weight(_text_:3a in 973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.48167917 = score(doc=973,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.42852643 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050545633 = queryNorm
            1.1240361 = fieldWeight in 973, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=973)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Vgl.: http%3A%2F%2Fcreativechoice.org%2Fdoc%2FHansJonas.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1TM3teaYKgABL5H9yoIifA&opi=89978449.

0.07689886 = product of:
  0.15379772 = sum of:
    0.15379772 = sum of:
      0.1127083 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 1445) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.1127083 = score(doc=1445,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.3844716 = fieldWeight in 1445, 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=1445)
      0.04108941 = weight(_text_:22 in 1445) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04108941 = score(doc=1445,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1445, 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=1445)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Recent approaches to KO have explored the notion of intertextuality and considered ways in which such abstract concepts derived from literary theory might form the foundation for the design of novel and rich information retrieval systems. In this paper, the notion of intertextuality is examined, and its use by knowledge organization researchers explored. Gerard Genette's work in particular has been used with some success to map out the possibilities offered by applying the concept of intertextuality to the design of information retrieval systems. The paper will examine some KO systems which reveal the traces of intertextual poetics in their design, including the FRBR model which in its mapping of intertextuality, articulates some of Genette's categories while stopping short of actualising the more subjective and interpretative categories. The paper concludes with speculation about whether and how these categories might be accommodated in a Web 2.0 interactive digital bibliosphere.

Source

Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik

0.07689886 = product of:
  0.15379772 = sum of:
    0.15379772 = sum of:
      0.1127083 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 4072) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.1127083 = score(doc=4072,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.3844716 = fieldWeight in 4072, 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=4072)
      0.04108941 = weight(_text_:22 in 4072) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04108941 = score(doc=4072,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4072, 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=4072)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 1.2018 17:33:05

0.07044269 = product of:
  0.14088538 = sum of:
    0.14088538 = product of:
      0.28177077 = sum of:
        0.28177077 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 4076) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.28177077 = score(doc=4076,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050545633 = queryNorm
            0.961179 = fieldWeight in 4076, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4076)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Unter Bibliothek 2.0 verstehen die Herausgeber eine Einrichtung, die die Prinzipien des Web 2.0 wie Offenheit, Wiederverwendung (ReUse), Kollaboration und Interaktion in der Gesamtorganisation anwendet. Bibliotheken erweitern Serviceangebote und Arbeitsabläufe um die Möglichkeiten der Web 2.0-Technologien. Dies verändert Berufsbild und Selbstverständnis der Bibliothekare. Der Sammelband bietet einen kompletten Überblick zum Thema Bibliothek 2.0 und den aktuellen Stand der Entwicklungen aus technologischer, soziologischer, informationstheoretischer sowie praxisorientierter Sicht.

LCSH

Web 2.0

RSWK

Bibliothek / World Wide Web 2.0 / Aufsatzsammlung

Subject

Bibliothek / World Wide Web 2.0 / Aufsatzsammlung
Web 2.0

0.06901945 = product of:
  0.1380389 = sum of:
    0.1380389 = product of:
      0.2760778 = sum of:
        0.2760778 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 4766) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.2760778 = score(doc=4766,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050545633 = queryNorm
            0.9417592 = fieldWeight in 4766, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4766)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Is Web 2.0 more than a buzzword? In recent years, technologists and others have heatedly debated this question, even in Wikipedia, itself an example of Web 2.0. From the perspective of the present study, Web 2.0 may indeed be a buzzword, but more substantially it is also an example of an organizing vision that drives a community's discourse about certain new Information Technology (IT), serving to advance the technology's adoption and diffusion. Every organizing vision has a career that reflects its construction over time, and in the present study we examine Web 2.0's career as captured in its Wikipedia entry over a 5-year period, finding that it falls into three distinct periods termed Germination, Growth, and Maturation. The findings reveal how Wikipedia, as a discourse vehicle, treats new IT and its many buzzwords, and more broadly captures the careers of their organizing visions. Too, they further our understanding of Wikipedia as a new encyclopedic form, providing novel insights into its uses, its community of contributors, and their editing activities, as well as the dynamics of article construction.

Object

Web 2.0

0.06689989 = product of:
  0.13379978 = sum of:
    0.13379978 = product of:
      0.4013993 = sum of:
        0.4013993 = weight(_text_:3a in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.4013993 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.42852643 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050545633 = 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)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  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

0.066414006 = product of:
  0.13282801 = sum of:
    0.13282801 = product of:
      0.26565602 = sum of:
        0.26565602 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 4080) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.26565602 = score(doc=4080,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050545633 = queryNorm
            0.9062083 = fieldWeight in 4080, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4080)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Das Web 2.0 hat einen Paradigmenwechsel im Umgang mit Informationen und damit eng verbunden im Wissenserwerb eingeleitet. Theoretisch gesehen hat jeder offenen Zugang zu vielfältigen Informationen und kann gleichzeitig selbst Inhalte beisteuern - z.B. in Sozialen Netzwerken, in Weblogs oder Wikis - und Websites oder andere Dokumente (Videos, Slideshows o.ä.) veröffentlichen und mit anderen Nutzern teilen. Dieser Demokratisierungsprozess von Wissensproduktion, -kommunikation und -erwerb ist allerdings nicht frei von Kontroversen. Das verstärkte Nebeneinander von sachlich richtiger und relevanter Information einerseits und Belanglosigkeiten andererseits ruft auch Gegner auf den Plan. Sie sprechen von einem Information Overkill und befürchten den Niedergang der klassischen Bildung. Führen freie Wissenszugänge im Netz tatsächlich zu weniger Bildung? Was macht eine Website zu einer zuverlässigen und vertrauenswürdigen Quelle? Wie können aus der Fülle von Webressourcen die qualitativ hochwertigen herausgefiltert werden? Welchen Beitrag kann dabei Social Software leisten? Welches sind die Konstituenten einer Informationskompetenz 2.0, über die User verfügen sollten, um mit vorgefundenen Ressourcen adäquat umgehen zu können? Und inwiefern sind Bibliotheken - die sich ja zunehmend als Teaching Libraries verstehen - hier gefordert? Auf diese Fragen versucht das vorliegende Buch Antworten zu geben. Der Fokus liegt auf dem Umgang mit Wissensressourcen im Web 2.0, wobei ebenso theoretische wie praktische Implikationen berücksichtigt und ausgewählte Evaluierungsansätze hinsichtlich ihrer praktischen Anwendbarkeit für die User diskutiert werden.

Object

Web 2.0

RSWK

World Wide Web 2.0 / Information Retrieval / Informationskompetenz

Series

Web 2.0

Subject

World Wide Web 2.0 / Information Retrieval / Informationskompetenz

0.066414006 = product of:
  0.13282801 = sum of:
    0.13282801 = product of:
      0.26565602 = sum of:
        0.26565602 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 5162) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.26565602 = score(doc=5162,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050545633 = queryNorm
            0.9062083 = fieldWeight in 5162, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5162)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Object

BIBFRAME 2.0

0.06574651 = product of:
  0.13149302 = sum of:
    0.13149302 = product of:
      0.26298603 = sum of:
        0.26298603 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 1479) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.26298603 = score(doc=1479,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050545633 = queryNorm
            0.8971004 = fieldWeight in 1479, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1479)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Catalogue 2.0: the future of the library catalogue. Ed. by Sally Chambers

0.06574651 = product of:
  0.13149302 = sum of:
    0.13149302 = product of:
      0.26298603 = sum of:
        0.26298603 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 1480) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.26298603 = score(doc=1480,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050545633 = queryNorm
            0.8971004 = fieldWeight in 1480, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1480)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Catalogue 2.0: the future of the library catalogue. Ed. by Sally Chambers

0.06507217 = product of:
  0.13014434 = sum of:
    0.13014434 = product of:
      0.2602887 = sum of:
        0.2602887 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 4901) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.2602887 = score(doc=4901,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050545633 = queryNorm
            0.8878992 = fieldWeight in 4901, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4901)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Plattformen für Blended Learning, Lernsysteme (wie Moodle), Dienste im Web 2.0 (z. B. Facebook), ePortfolio-Systeme (beispielsweise Mahara), Verfilmungen von Lehrveranstaltungen und weitere Informationsdienste haben breite Anwendung in der Lehre gefunden. Durch das Angebot mobiler Endgeräte (Smartphones, Tablet-Rechner und Laptops) werden die Dienste zunehmend mobil genutzt. Dieser Bericht gibt in informationswissenschaftlicher Perspektive Forschungsergebnisse wieder, die auf der 6. ICT Konferenz in Hongkong "Education unplugged: Mobile Technologies and Web 2.0" (Juli 2011) vorgetragen worden sind.

0.064082384 = product of:
  0.12816477 = sum of:
    0.12816477 = sum of:
      0.09392358 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 3524) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.09392358 = score(doc=3524,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.320393 = fieldWeight in 3524, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3524)
      0.034241177 = weight(_text_:22 in 3524) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034241177 = score(doc=3524,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17700219 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050545633 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3524, 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=3524)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Tags (keywords freely assigned by users to describe web content) have become highly popular on Web 2.0 applications, because of the strong stimuli and easiness for users to create and describe their own content. This increase in tag popularity has led to a vast literature on tag recommendation methods. These methods aim at assisting users in the tagging process, possibly increasing the quality of the generated tags and, consequently, improving the quality of the information retrieval (IR) services that rely on tags as data sources. Regardless of the numerous and diversified previous studies on tag recommendation, to our knowledge, no previous work has summarized and organized them into a single survey article. In this article, we propose a taxonomy for tag recommendation methods, classifying them according to the target of the recommendations, their objectives, exploited data sources, and underlying techniques. Moreover, we provide a critical overview of these methods, pointing out their advantages and disadvantages. Finally, we describe the main open challenges related to the field, such as tag ambiguity, cold start, and evaluation issues.

Date

16.11.2017 13:30:22

0.057516214 = product of:
  0.11503243 = sum of:
    0.11503243 = product of:
      0.23006485 = sum of:
        0.23006485 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 5172) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.23006485 = score(doc=5172,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050545633 = queryNorm
            0.7847994 = fieldWeight in 5172, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5172)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

One of the big challenges facing academic libraries today is to increase the relevance of the libraries to their user communities. If the libraries can increase the visibility of their resources on the open web, it will increase the chances of the libraries to reach to their user communities via the user's first search experience. BIBFRAME and library Linked Data will enable libraries to publish their resources in a way that the Web understands, consume Linked Data to enrich their resources relevant to the libraries' user communities, and visualize networks across collections. However, one of the important steps for transitioning to BIBFRAME and library Linked Data involves crosswalks, mapping MARC fields and subfields across data models and performing necessary data reformatting to be in compliance with the specifications of the new model, which is currently BIBFRAME 2.0. This article looks into how the Library of Congress has mapped library bibliographic data from the MARC format to the BIBFRAME 2.0 model and vocabulary published and updated since April 2016, available from http://www.loc.gov/bibframe/docs/index.html based on the recently released conversion specifications and converter, developed by the Library of Congress with input from many community members. The BIBFRAME 2.0 standard and conversion tools will enable libraries to transform bibliographic data from MARC into BIBFRAME 2.0, which introduces a Linked Data model as the improved method of bibliographic control for the future, and make bibliographic information more useful within and beyond library communities.

Object

BIBFRAME 2.0

0.05693815 = product of:
  0.1138763 = sum of:
    0.1138763 = product of:
      0.2277526 = sum of:
        0.2277526 = weight(_text_:2.0 in 4909) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.2277526 = score(doc=4909,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.29315117 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050545633 = queryNorm
            0.7769118 = fieldWeight in 4909, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4909)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Die große Fülle an nutzergeneriertem Content im Web 2.0 bedarf einer Strukturierung, will man diese Inhalte sinnvoll nutzen können. Im Internet hat sich mit den Folksonomies eigenständig eine Methode zur inhaltlichen Erschließung von digitalen Ressourcen etabliert. Die Verschlagwortung durch freie, von den Nutzern erstellte Tags zeigt viel Potential, birgt aber auch einige Risiken. Der Beitrag soll grundlegend in die Funktionsweise von Folksonomies einführen und dabei auch Vor- und Nachteile dieser Methode der Wissensrepräsentation ansprechen. Außerdem soll anhand von Beispielen kurz gezeigt werden, wie Folksonomies sinnvoll von Bibliotheken eingesetzt werden können.

Content

Inhalt 1. Zur Notwendigkeit der Inhaltserschließung im Web 2.0 2. Funktion und Nutzen von Folksonomies 3. Folksonomies in Bibliotheken 4. Danksagung

Object

Web 2.0