-
Caplan, P.; Guenther, R.: Metadata for Internet resources : the Dublin Core Metadata Elements Set and its mapping to USMARC (1996)
0.03
0.033447683 = product of:
0.11706689 = sum of:
0.026916584 = weight(_text_:classification in 2408) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026916584 = score(doc=2408,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 2408, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2408)
0.04022163 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2408) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04022163 = score(doc=2408,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.34409973 = fieldWeight in 2408, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2408)
0.026916584 = weight(_text_:classification in 2408) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026916584 = score(doc=2408,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 2408, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2408)
0.02301209 = product of:
0.04602418 = sum of:
0.04602418 = weight(_text_:22 in 2408) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04602418 = score(doc=2408,freq=4.0), product of:
0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 2408, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2408)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.2857143 = coord(4/14)
- Date
- 13. 1.2007 18:31:22
- Footnote
- Simultaneously published as Electronic Resources: Selection and Bibliographic Control
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) nos.3/4, S.43-58
-
Carvalho, J.R. de; Cordeiro, M.I.; Lopes, A.; Vieira, M.: Meta-information about MARC : an XML framework for validation, explanation and help systems (2004)
0.02
0.019066125 = product of:
0.13346288 = sum of:
0.035193928 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2848) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035193928 = score(doc=2848,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.30108726 = fieldWeight in 2848, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2848)
0.09826894 = sum of:
0.069792934 = weight(_text_:texts in 2848) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.069792934 = score(doc=2848,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16460659 = queryWeight, product of:
5.4822793 = idf(docFreq=499, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.42399842 = fieldWeight in 2848, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.4822793 = idf(docFreq=499, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2848)
0.02847601 = weight(_text_:22 in 2848) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02847601 = score(doc=2848,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2848, 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=2848)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- This article proposes a schema for meta-information about MARC that can express at a fairly comprehensive level the syntactic and semantic aspects of MARC formats in XML, including not only rules but also all texts and examples that are conveyed by MARC documentation. It can be thought of as an XML version of the MARC or UNIMARC manuals, for both machine and human usage. The article explains how such a schema can be the central piece of a more complete framework, to be used in conjunction with "slim" record formats, providing a rich environment for the automated processing of bibliographic data.
- Source
- Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.131-137
-
Tennant, R.: ¬A bibliographic metadata infrastructure for the twenty-first century (2004)
0.01
0.011413438 = product of:
0.079894066 = sum of:
0.056881975 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056881975 = score(doc=2845,freq=4.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.4866305 = fieldWeight in 2845, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2845)
0.02301209 = product of:
0.04602418 = sum of:
0.04602418 = weight(_text_:22 in 2845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04602418 = score(doc=2845,freq=4.0), product of:
0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 2845, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2845)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- The current library bibliographic infrastructure was constructed in the early days of computers - before the Web, XML, and a variety of other technological advances that now offer new opportunities. General requirements of a modern metadata infrastructure for libraries are identified, including such qualities as versatility, extensibility, granularity, and openness. A new kind of metadata infrastructure is then proposed that exhibits at least some of those qualities. Some key challenges that must be overcome to implement a change of this magnitude are identified.
- Date
- 9.12.2005 19:22:38
- Source
- Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.175-181
-
Kurth, M.; Ruddy, D.; Rupp, N.: Repurposing MARC metadata : using digital project experience to develop a metadata management design (2004)
0.01
0.008794995 = product of:
0.06156496 = sum of:
0.049360957 = product of:
0.098721914 = sum of:
0.098721914 = weight(_text_:schemes in 4748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.098721914 = score(doc=4748,freq=6.0), product of:
0.16067243 = queryWeight, product of:
5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.6144297 = fieldWeight in 4748, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4748)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.0122040035 = product of:
0.024408007 = sum of:
0.024408007 = weight(_text_:22 in 4748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024408007 = score(doc=4748,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4748, 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=4748)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- Metadata and information technology staff in libraries that are building digital collections typically extract and manipulate MARC metadata sets to provide access to digital content via non-MARC schemes. Metadata processing in these libraries involves defining the relationships between metadata schemes, moving metadata between schemes, and coordinating the intellectual activity and physical resources required to create and manipulate metadata. Actively managing the non-MARC metadata resources used to build digital collections is something most of these libraries have only begun to do. This article proposes strategies for managing MARC metadata repurposing efforts as the first step in a coordinated approach to library metadata management. Guided by lessons learned from Cornell University library mapping and transformation activities, the authors apply the literature of data resource management to library metadata management and propose a model for managing MARC metadata repurposing processes through the implementation of a metadata management design.
- Source
- Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.144-152
-
Tosaka, Y.; Park, J.-r.: RDA: Resource description & access : a survey of the current state of the art (2013)
0.01
0.008109867 = product of:
0.05676906 = sum of:
0.021217827 = weight(_text_:subject in 677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021217827 = score(doc=677,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.19758089 = fieldWeight in 677, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=677)
0.035551235 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035551235 = score(doc=677,freq=4.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.30414405 = fieldWeight in 677, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=677)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- Resource Description & Access (RDA) is intended to provide a flexible and extensible framework that can accommodate all types of content and media within rapidly evolving digital environments while also maintaining compatibility with the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules, 2nd edition (AACR2). The cataloging community is grappling with practical issues in navigating the transition from AACR2 to RDA; there is a definite need to evaluate major subject areas and broader themes in information organization under the new RDA paradigm. This article aims to accomplish this task through a thorough and critical review of the emerging RDA literature published from 2005 to 2011. The review mostly concerns key areas of difference between RDA and AACR2, the relationship of the new cataloging code to metadata standards, the impact on encoding standards such as Machine-Readable Cataloging (MARC), end user considerations, and practitioners' views on RDA implementation and training. Future research will require more in-depth studies of RDA's expected benefits and the manner in which the new cataloging code will improve resource retrieval and bibliographic control for users and catalogers alike over AACR2. The question as to how the cataloging community can best move forward to the post-AACR2/MARC environment must be addressed carefully so as to chart the future of bibliographic control in the evolving environment of information production, management, and use.
-
McDonough, J.P.: SGML and USMARC standard : applying markup to bibliographic data (1998)
0.01
0.005745948 = product of:
0.08044326 = sum of:
0.08044326 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08044326 = score(doc=1425,freq=8.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.68819946 = fieldWeight in 1425, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1425)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Abstract
- The recent increase in electronic publishing has led many in the library community to consider altering standards for bibliographic data to promote greater compatibility between digital works and their bibliographic representation. SGML has been prominently mentioned as a mechanism for encoding bibliographic data. Examines the problems and potential of applying SGML to to USMARC record standard, with a particular emphasis on issues of field order and repeatability, character set encoding, and obsolete fields
-
Lupovici, C.: ¬L'¬information secondaire du document primaire : format MARC ou SGML? (1997)
0.00
0.0043541198 = product of:
0.060957674 = sum of:
0.060957674 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 892) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.060957674 = score(doc=892,freq=6.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.52149844 = fieldWeight in 892, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=892)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Abstract
- Secondary information, e.g. MARC based bibliographic records, comprises structured data for identifying, tagging, retrieving and management of primary documents. SGML, the standard format for coding content and structure of primary documents, was introduced in 1986 as a publishing tool but is now being applied to bibliographic records. SGML now comprises standard definitions (DTD) for books, serials, articles and mathematical formulae. A simplified version (HTML) is used for Web pages. Pilot projects to develop SGML as a standard for bibliographic exchange include the Dublin Core, listing 13 descriptive elements for Internet documents; the French GRISELI programme using SGML for exchanging grey literature and US experiments on reformatting USMARC for use with SGML-based records
-
Nichols introduces MARCit (1998)
0.00
0.0043094605 = product of:
0.060332447 = sum of:
0.060332447 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1438) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.060332447 = score(doc=1438,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.5161496 = fieldWeight in 1438, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1438)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Abstract
- Reports the release of MARCit, a software package that enables the cataloguing of Internet resources into MARC format bibliographic records
-
ISO 8459: Bibliographic data element directory : Pt.1: Interloan applications (ISO 8459-1:1988). - Pt.2: Acquisition applications (ISO 8459-2:1992). - Pt.3: Information retrieval applications (ISO 8459-3:1994). - Pt.4: Circulation applications (ISO/CD 8459-4:1996) - Pt.5: Data elements for the exchange of cataloguing and metadata (ISO/DIS 8459-5:2000) (1988-)
0.00
0.0035912173 = product of:
0.05027704 = sum of:
0.05027704 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 4439) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05027704 = score(doc=4439,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.43012467 = fieldWeight in 4439, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4439)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
-
Jimenez, V.O.R.: Nuevas perspectivas para la catalogacion : metadatos ver MARC (1999)
0.00
0.0024655813 = product of:
0.034518138 = sum of:
0.034518138 = product of:
0.069036275 = sum of:
0.069036275 = weight(_text_:22 in 5743) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.069036275 = score(doc=5743,freq=4.0), product of:
0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.6565931 = fieldWeight in 5743, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5743)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Date
- 30. 3.2002 19:45:22
- Source
- Revista Española de Documentaçion Cientifica. 22(1999) no.2, S.198-219
-
MARC and metadata : METS, MODS, and MARCXML: current and future implications (2004)
0.00
0.0023245723 = product of:
0.03254401 = sum of:
0.03254401 = product of:
0.06508802 = sum of:
0.06508802 = weight(_text_:22 in 2840) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06508802 = score(doc=2840,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 2840, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2840)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Source
- Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1
-
Zapounidou, S.; Sfakakis, M.; Papatheodorou, C.: Library data integration : towards BIBFRAME mapping to EDM (2014)
0.00
0.0021547303 = product of:
0.030166224 = sum of:
0.030166224 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030166224 = score(doc=1589,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.2580748 = fieldWeight in 1589, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1589)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Abstract
- Integration of library data into the Linked Data environment is a key issue in libraries and is approached on the basis of interoperability between library data conceptual models. Achieving interoperability for different representations of the same or related entities between the library and cultural heritage domains shall enhance rich bibliographic data reusability and support the development of new data-driven information services. This paper aims to contribute to the desired interoperability by attempting to map core semantic paths between the BIBFRAME and EDM conceptual models. BIBFRAME is developed by the Library of Congress to support transformation of legacy library data in MARC format into linked data. EDM is the model developed for and used in the Europeana Cultural Heritage aggregation portal.
-
MARC and metadata : METS, MODS, and MARCXML: current and future implications (2004)
0.00
0.0020340008 = product of:
0.02847601 = sum of:
0.02847601 = product of:
0.05695202 = sum of:
0.05695202 = weight(_text_:22 in 7196) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05695202 = score(doc=7196,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 7196, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=7196)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Source
- Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1
-
MARC and metadata : METS, MODS, and MARCXML: current and future implications part 2 (2004)
0.00
0.0020340008 = product of:
0.02847601 = sum of:
0.02847601 = product of:
0.05695202 = sum of:
0.05695202 = weight(_text_:22 in 2841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05695202 = score(doc=2841,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 2841, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2841)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Source
- Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2
-
Proffitt, M.: Pulling it all together : use of METS in RLG cultural materials service (2004)
0.00
0.0011622861 = product of:
0.016272005 = sum of:
0.016272005 = product of:
0.03254401 = sum of:
0.03254401 = weight(_text_:22 in 767) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03254401 = score(doc=767,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 767, 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=767)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Source
- Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1, S.65-68
-
McCallum, S.H.: ¬An introduction to the Metadata Object Description Schema (MODS) (2004)
0.00
0.0011622861 = product of:
0.016272005 = sum of:
0.016272005 = product of:
0.03254401 = sum of:
0.03254401 = weight(_text_:22 in 81) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03254401 = score(doc=81,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 81, 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=81)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Source
- Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1, S.82-88
-
Cundiff, M.V.: ¬An introduction to the Metadata Encoding and Transmission Standard (METS) (2004)
0.00
0.0011622861 = product of:
0.016272005 = sum of:
0.016272005 = product of:
0.03254401 = sum of:
0.03254401 = weight(_text_:22 in 2834) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03254401 = score(doc=2834,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2834, 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=2834)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Source
- Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1, S.52-64
-
El-Sherbini, M.: Metadata and the future of cataloging (2001)
0.00
0.0011622861 = product of:
0.016272005 = sum of:
0.016272005 = product of:
0.03254401 = sum of:
0.03254401 = weight(_text_:22 in 751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03254401 = score(doc=751,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 751, 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=751)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Date
- 23. 1.2007 11:22:30
-
Guenther, R.S.: Using the Metadata Object Description Schema (MODS) for resource description : guidelines and applications (2004)
0.00
0.0010170004 = product of:
0.014238005 = sum of:
0.014238005 = product of:
0.02847601 = sum of:
0.02847601 = weight(_text_:22 in 2837) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02847601 = score(doc=2837,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2837, 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=2837)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Source
- Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1, S.89-98
-
Eden, B.L.: Metadata and librarianship : will MARC survive? (2004)
0.00
0.0010170004 = product of:
0.014238005 = sum of:
0.014238005 = product of:
0.02847601 = sum of:
0.02847601 = weight(_text_:22 in 4750) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02847601 = score(doc=4750,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4750, 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=4750)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Source
- Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1, S.6-7
