Search (68 results, page 1 of 4)

  • × theme_ss:"Metadaten"
  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. Dunsire, G.; Willer, M.: Initiatives to make standard library metadata models and structures available to the Semantic Web (2010) 0.03 
    0.02830489 = product of:
  0.09906711 = sum of:
    0.024005229 = weight(_text_:subject in 3965) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024005229 = score(doc=3965,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.22353725 = fieldWeight in 3965, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3965)
    0.023310447 = weight(_text_:classification in 3965) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023310447 = score(doc=3965,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24377833 = fieldWeight in 3965, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3965)
    0.028440988 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 3965) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028440988 = score(doc=3965,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24331525 = fieldWeight in 3965, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3965)
    0.023310447 = weight(_text_:classification in 3965) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023310447 = score(doc=3965,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24377833 = fieldWeight in 3965, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3965)
  0.2857143 = coord(4/14)
    Abstract
    This paper describes recent initiatives to make standard library metadata models and structures available to the Semantic Web, including IFLA standards such as Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR), Functional Requirements for Authority Data (FRAD), and International Standard Bibliographic Description (ISBD) along with the infrastructure that supports them. The FRBR Review Group is currently developing representations of FRAD and the entityrelationship model of FRBR in resource description framework (RDF) applications, using a combination of RDF, RDF Schema (RDFS), Simple Knowledge Organisation System (SKOS) and Web Ontology Language (OWL), cross-relating both models where appropriate. The ISBD/XML Task Group is investigating the representation of ISBD in RDF. The IFLA Namespaces project is developing an administrative and technical infrastructure to support such initiatives and encourage uptake of standards by other agencies. The paper describes similar initiatives with related external standards such as RDA - resource description and access, REICAT (the new Italian cataloguing rules) and CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model (CRM). The DCMI RDA Task Group is working with the Joint Steering Committee for RDA to develop Semantic Web representations of RDA structural elements, which are aligned with FRBR and FRAD, and controlled metadata content vocabularies. REICAT is also based on FRBR, and an object-oriented version of FRBR has been integrated with CRM, which itself has an RDF representation. CRM was initially based on the metadata needs of the museum community, and is now seeking extension to the archives community with the eventual aim of developing a model common to the main cultural information domains of archives, libraries and museums. The Vocabulary Mapping Framework (VMF) project has developed a Semantic Web tool to automatically generate mappings between metadata models from the information communities, including publishers. The tool is based on several standards, including CRM, FRAD, FRBR, MARC21 and RDA.
    The paper discusses the importance of these initiatives in releasing as linked data the very large quantities of rich, professionally-generated metadata stored in formats based on these standards, such as UNIMARC and MARC21, addressing such issues as critical mass for semantic and statistical inferencing, integration with user- and machine-generated metadata, and authenticity, veracity and trust. The paper also discusses related initiatives to release controlled vocabularies, including the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), ISBD, Library of Congress Name Authority File (LCNAF), Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH), Rameau (French subject headings), Universal Decimal Classification (UDC), and the Virtual International Authority File (VIAF) as linked data. Finally, the paper discusses the potential collective impact of these initiatives on metadata workflows and management systems.
    Content
    Vortrag im Rahmen der Session 93. Cataloguing der WORLD LIBRARY AND INFORMATION CONGRESS: 76TH IFLA GENERAL CONFERENCE AND ASSEMBLY, 10-15 August 2010, Gothenburg, Sweden - 149. Information Technology, Cataloguing, Classification and Indexing with Knowledge Management
  2. Sturmane, A.; Eglite, E.; Jankevica-Balode, M.: Subject metadata development for digital resources in Latvia (2014) 0.03 
    0.028097644 = product of:
  0.13112234 = sum of:
    0.084018305 = weight(_text_:subject in 1963) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.084018305 = score(doc=1963,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.7823804 = fieldWeight in 1963, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1963)
    0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1963) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023552012 = score(doc=1963,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1963, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1963)
    0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1963) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023552012 = score(doc=1963,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1963, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1963)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    The National Library of Latvia (NLL) made a decision to use the Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) in 2000. At present the NLL Subject Headings Database in Latvian holds approximately 34,000 subject headings and is used for subject cataloging of textual resources, including articles from serials. For digital objects NLL uses a system like Faceted Application of Subject Terminology (FAST). We succesfully use it in the project "In Search of Lost Latvia," one of the milestones in the development of the subject cataloging of digital resources in Latvia.
    Footnote
    Contribution in a special issue "Beyond libraries: Subject metadata in the digital environment and Semantic Web" - Enthält Beiträge der gleichnamigen IFLA Satellite Post-Conference, 17-18 August 2012, Tallinn.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 52(2014) no.1, S.20-31
  3. Zavalina, O.L.: Complementarity in subject metadata in large-scale digital libraries : a comparative analysis (2014) 0.03 
    0.025905184 = product of:
  0.120890856 = sum of:
    0.08051598 = weight(_text_:subject in 1972) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08051598 = score(doc=1972,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.7497667 = fieldWeight in 1972, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1972)
    0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 1972) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02018744 = score(doc=1972,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 1972, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1972)
    0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 1972) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02018744 = score(doc=1972,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 1972, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1972)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    Provision of high-quality subject metadata is crucial for organizing adequate subject access to rich content aggregated by digital libraries. A number of large-scale digital libraries worldwide are now generating subject metadata to describe not only individual objects but entire digital collections as an integral whole. However, little research to date has been conducted to empirically evaluate the quality of this collection-level subject metadata. The study presented in this article compares free-text and controlled-vocabulary collection-level subject metadata in three large-scale cultural heritage digital libraries in the United States and the European Union. As revealed by this study, the emerging best practices for creating rich collection-level subject metadata includes describing a collection's subject matter with mutually complementary data values in controlled-vocabulary and free-text subject metadata elements. Three kinds of complementarity were observed in this study: one-way complementarity, two-way complementarity, and multiple complementarity.
    Footnote
    Contribution in a special issue "Beyond libraries: Subject metadata in the digital environment and Semantic Web" - Enthält Beiträge der gleichnamigen IFLA Satellite Post-Conference, 17-18 August 2012, Tallinn.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 52(2014) no.1, S.77-89
  4. Ashton, J.; Kent, C.: New approaches to subject indexing at the British Library (2017) 0.02 
    0.022824414 = product of:
  0.10651393 = sum of:
    0.059409913 = weight(_text_:subject in 5158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.059409913 = score(doc=5158,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.5532265 = fieldWeight in 5158, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5158)
    0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 5158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023552012 = score(doc=5158,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 5158, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5158)
    0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 5158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023552012 = score(doc=5158,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 5158, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5158)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    The constantly changing metadata landscape means that libraries need to re-think their approach to standards and subject analysis, to enable the discovery of vast areas of both print and digital content. This article presents a case study from the British Library that assesses the feasibility of adopting FAST (Faceted Application of Subject Terminology) to selectively extend the scope of subject indexing of current and legacy content, or implement FAST as a replacement for all LCSH in current cataloging workflows.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 55(2017) no.7/8, S.549-559
  5. Hook, P.A.; Gantchev, A.: Using combined metadata sources to visualize a small library (OBL's English Language Books) (2017) 0.02 
    0.022654418 = product of:
  0.10572062 = sum of:
    0.0474445 = weight(_text_:subject in 3870) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0474445 = score(doc=3870,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.4418043 = fieldWeight in 3870, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3870)
    0.029138058 = weight(_text_:classification in 3870) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029138058 = score(doc=3870,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.3047229 = fieldWeight in 3870, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3870)
    0.029138058 = weight(_text_:classification in 3870) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029138058 = score(doc=3870,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.3047229 = fieldWeight in 3870, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3870)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    Data from multiple knowledge organization systems are combined to provide a global overview of the content holdings of a small personal library. Subject headings and classification data are used to effectively map the combined book and topic space of the library. While harvested and manipulated by hand, the work reveals issues and potential solutions when using automated techniques to produce topic maps of much larger libraries. The small library visualized consists of the thirty-nine, digital, English language books found in the Osama Bin Laden (OBL) compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan upon his death. As this list of books has garnered considerable media attention, it is worth providing a visual overview of the subject content of these books - some of which is not readily apparent from the titles. Metadata from subject headings and classification numbers was combined to create book-subject maps. Tree maps of the classification data were also produced. The books contain 328 subject headings. In order to enhance the base map with meaningful thematic overlay, library holding count data was also harvested (and aggregated from duplicates). This additional data revealed the relative scarcity or popularity of individual books.
  6. Bundza, M.: ¬The choice is yours! : researchers assign subject metadata to their own materials in institutional repositories (2014) 0.02 
    0.021118827 = product of:
  0.09855452 = sum of:
    0.0514505 = weight(_text_:subject in 1968) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0514505 = score(doc=1968,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.4791082 = fieldWeight in 1968, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1968)
    0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1968) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023552012 = score(doc=1968,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1968, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1968)
    0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1968) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023552012 = score(doc=1968,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1968, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1968)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    The Digital Commons platform for institutional repositories provides a three-tiered taxonomy of academic disciplines for each item submitted to the repository. Since faculty and departmental administrators across campuses are encouraged to submit materials to the institutional repository themselves, they must also assign disciplines or subject categories for their own work. The expandable drop-down menu of about 1,000 categories is easy to use, and facilitates the growth of the institutional repository and access to the materials through the Internet.
    Footnote
    Contribution in a special issue "Beyond libraries: Subject metadata in the digital environment and Semantic Web" - Enthält Beiträge der gleichnamigen IFLA Satellite Post-Conference, 17-18 August 2012, Tallinn.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 52(2014) no.1, S.110-118
  7. Kleeck, D. Van; Nakano, H.; Langford, G.; Shelton, T.; Lundgren, J.; O'Dell, A.J.: Managing bibliographic data quality for electronic resources (2017) 0.02 
    0.02075909 = product of:
  0.09687576 = sum of:
    0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 5160) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023552012 = score(doc=5160,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 5160, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5160)
    0.04977173 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5160) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04977173 = score(doc=5160,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.4258017 = fieldWeight in 5160, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5160)
    0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 5160) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023552012 = score(doc=5160,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 5160, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5160)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    This article presents a case study of quality management issues for electronic resource metadata to assess the support of user tasks (find, select, and obtain library resources) and potential for increased efficiencies in acquisitions and cataloging workflows. The authors evaluated the quality of existing bibliographic records (mostly vendor supplied) for e-resource collections as compared with records for the same collections in OCLC's WorldShare Collection Manager (WCM). Findings are that WCM records better support user tasks by containing more summaries and tables of contents; other checkpoints are largely comparable between the two source record groups. The transition to WCM records is discussed.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 55(2017) no.7/8, S.560-577
  8. Kopácsi, S. et al.: Development of a classification server to support metadata harmonization in a long term preservation system (2016) 0.02 
    0.018778171 = product of:
  0.087631464 = sum of:
    0.03364573 = weight(_text_:classification in 3280) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03364573 = score(doc=3280,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.35186368 = fieldWeight in 3280, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3280)
    0.03364573 = weight(_text_:classification in 3280) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03364573 = score(doc=3280,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.35186368 = fieldWeight in 3280, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3280)
    0.020340007 = product of:
      0.040680014 = sum of:
        0.040680014 = weight(_text_:22 in 3280) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040680014 = score(doc=3280,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3280, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3280)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Source
    Metadata and semantics research: 10th International Conference, MTSR 2016, Göttingen, Germany, November 22-25, 2016, Proceedings. Eds.: E. Garoufallou
  9. Kleeck, D. Van; Langford, G.; Lundgren, J.; Nakano, H.; O'Dell, A.J.; Shelton, T.: Managing bibliographic data quality in a consortial academic library : a case study (2016) 0.02 
    0.017635275 = product of:
  0.08229795 = sum of:
    0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 5133) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023552012 = score(doc=5133,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 5133, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5133)
    0.035193928 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5133) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.035193928 = score(doc=5133,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.30108726 = fieldWeight in 5133, 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=5133)
    0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 5133) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023552012 = score(doc=5133,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 5133, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5133)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 54(2016) no.7, S.452-467
  10. Häusner, E.-M.; Sommerland, Y.: Assessment of metadata quality of the Swedish National Bibliography through mapping user awareness (2018) 0.02 
    0.017635275 = product of:
  0.08229795 = sum of:
    0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 5169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023552012 = score(doc=5169,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 5169, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5169)
    0.035193928 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.035193928 = score(doc=5169,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.30108726 = fieldWeight in 5169, 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=5169)
    0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 5169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023552012 = score(doc=5169,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 5169, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5169)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    This article is examining if the metadata quality of the Swedish National Bibliography could be measured through mapping the level of user awareness regarding the characteristics of the data. A qualitative meta-synthesis was carried out and results from two previous studies conducted at the National Library of Sweden were interpreted and conceptualized through an integrated analyze. The results of the meta-synthesis showed a need for an action plan for increasing user awareness to efficiently reach target groups of national bibliographic data at its fullest potential, i.e. user awareness on the usability and the quality of the metadata.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 56(2018) no.1, S.96-109
  11. Khoo, M.J.; Ahn, J.-w.; Binding, C.; Jones, H.J.; Lin, X.; Massam, D.; Tudhope, D.: Augmenting Dublin Core digital library metadata with Dewey Decimal Classification (2015) 0.02 
    0.01513417 = product of:
  0.070626125 = sum of:
    0.024005229 = weight(_text_:subject in 2320) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024005229 = score(doc=2320,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.22353725 = fieldWeight in 2320, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2320)
    0.023310447 = weight(_text_:classification in 2320) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023310447 = score(doc=2320,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24377833 = fieldWeight in 2320, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2320)
    0.023310447 = weight(_text_:classification in 2320) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023310447 = score(doc=2320,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24377833 = fieldWeight in 2320, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2320)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to describe a new approach to a well-known problem for digital libraries, how to search across multiple unrelated libraries with a single query. Design/methodology/approach - The approach involves creating new Dewey Decimal Classification terms and numbers from existing Dublin Core records. In total, 263,550 records were harvested from three digital libraries. Weighted key terms were extracted from the title, description and subject fields of each record. Ranked DDC classes were automatically generated from these key terms by considering DDC hierarchies via a series of filtering and aggregation stages. A mean reciprocal ranking evaluation compared a sample of 49 generated classes against DDC classes created by a trained librarian for the same records. Findings - The best results combined weighted key terms from the title, description and subject fields. Performance declines with increased specificity of DDC level. The results compare favorably with similar studies. Research limitations/implications - The metadata harvest required manual intervention and the evaluation was resource intensive. Future research will look at evaluation methodologies that take account of issues of consistency and ecological validity. Practical implications - The method does not require training data and is easily scalable. The pipeline can be customized for individual use cases, for example, recall or precision enhancing. Social implications - The approach can provide centralized access to information from multiple domains currently provided by individual digital libraries. Originality/value - The approach addresses metadata normalization in the context of web resources. The automatic classification approach accounts for matches within hierarchies, aggregating lower level matches to broader parents and thus approximates the practices of a human cataloger.
  12. White, H.: Examining scientific vocabulary : mapping controlled vocabularies with free text keywords (2013) 0.02 
    0.015022537 = product of:
  0.07010517 = sum of:
    0.026916584 = weight(_text_:classification in 1953) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026916584 = score(doc=1953,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 1953, 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=1953)
    0.026916584 = weight(_text_:classification in 1953) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026916584 = score(doc=1953,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 1953, 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=1953)
    0.016272005 = product of:
      0.03254401 = sum of:
        0.03254401 = weight(_text_:22 in 1953) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03254401 = score(doc=1953,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1953, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1953)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Date
    29. 5.2015 19:09:22
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 51(2013) no.6, S.655-674
  13. Lopatin, L.: Metadata practices in academic and non-academic libraries for digital projects : a survey (2010) 0.01 
    0.014758593 = product of:
  0.068873435 = sum of:
    0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 4165) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02018744 = score(doc=4165,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 4165, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4165)
    0.02849856 = product of:
      0.05699712 = sum of:
        0.05699712 = weight(_text_:schemes in 4165) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05699712 = score(doc=4165,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16067243 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.35474116 = fieldWeight in 4165, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4165)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 4165) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02018744 = score(doc=4165,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 4165, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4165)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    This article presents the results of a survey examining and comparing the metadata practices of academic and non-academic libraries regarding digital projects. It explores the types of metadata and vocabularies utilized, issues of interoperability, end-user-created metadata, and staffing for metadata planning and creation. Participants from 87 academic libraries and 40 non-academic libraries responded to the survey. The survey found that, despite their different environments, academic and non-academic libraries engage in similar metadata practices. The majority of the participating libraries have metadata librarians, who are the primary staff members responsible for all metadata activities. Academic libraries tend to use more metadata schemes, plan for metadata interoperability more frequently, and are more likely to have created new positions responsible for metadata for digital projects.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 48(2010) no.8, S.716-742
  14. Lubas, R.L.; Jackson, A.S.; Schneider, I.: ¬The metadata manual : a practical workbook (2013) 0.01 
    0.014758593 = product of:
  0.068873435 = sum of:
    0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 2089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02018744 = score(doc=2089,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 2089, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2089)
    0.02849856 = product of:
      0.05699712 = sum of:
        0.05699712 = weight(_text_:schemes in 2089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05699712 = score(doc=2089,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16067243 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.35474116 = fieldWeight in 2089, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2089)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 2089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02018744 = score(doc=2089,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 2089, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2089)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    Cultural heritage professionals have high levels of training in metadata. However, the institutions in which they practice often depend on support staff, volunteers, and students in order to function. With limited time and funding for training in metadata creation for digital collections, there are often many questions about metadata without a reliable, direct source for answers. The Metadata Manual provides such a resource, answering basic questions that may appear, and explores metadata from a beginner's perspective. This title covers metadata basics, XML basics, Dublin Core, VRA Core, and CDWA schemes and provides exercise in the creation of metadata
    Footnote
    Volltext unter: http://lib.myilibrary.com/Open.aspx?id=548935. Rez. in: Cataloging and classification quarterly 52(2015) no.2, S.250-251 (Timothy Keller).
  15. Leong, J.H.-t.: ¬The convergence of metadata and bibliographic control? : trends and patterns in addressing the current issues and challenges of providing subject access (2010) 0.01 
    0.0147388885 = product of:
  0.10317221 = sum of:
    0.05092278 = weight(_text_:subject in 3355) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05092278 = score(doc=3355,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.4741941 = fieldWeight in 3355, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3355)
    0.05224943 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 3355) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05224943 = score(doc=3355,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.44699866 = fieldWeight in 3355, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3355)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    Resource description and discovery have been facilitated generally in two approaches, namely bibliographic control and metadata, which now may converge in response to current issues and challenges of providing subject access. Four categories of major issues and challenges in the provision of subject access to digital and non-digital resources are: 1) the advancement of new knowledge; 2) the fall of controlled vocabulary and the rise of natural language; 3) digitizing and networking the traditional catalogue systems; and 4) electronic publishing and the Internet. The creation of new knowledge and the debate about the use of natural language and controlled vocabulary as subject headings becomes even more intense in the digital and online environment. The third and fourth categories are conceived after the emergence of networked environments and the rapid expansion of electronic resources. Recognizing the convergence of metadata schemas and bibliographic control calls for adapting to the new environment by developing tools that exploit the strengths of both.
  16. Raja, N.A.: Digitized content and index pages as alternative subject access fields (2012) 0.01 
    0.012394559 = product of:
  0.08676191 = sum of:
    0.044100422 = weight(_text_:subject in 870) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044100422 = score(doc=870,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.41066417 = fieldWeight in 870, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=870)
    0.042661484 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 870) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042661484 = score(doc=870,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.3649729 = fieldWeight in 870, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=870)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    This article describes a pilot study undertaken to test the benefits of the digitized Content and Index pages of books and content pages of journal Issues in providing subject access to documents in a collection. A partial digitization strategy is used to fossick specific information using the alternative subject access fields in bibliographic records. A pilot study was carried out to search for books and journal articles containing information on "Leadership., "Women Entrepreneurs., "Disinvestment. and "Digital preservation. through normal procedu re and based on information stored in MARC 21 fields 653, 505 and 520 of the bibliographic records in the University of Mumbai Library. The results are compared to draw the conclusions.
  17. Wartburg, K. von; Sibille, C.; Aliverti, C.: Metadata collaboration between the Swiss National Library and research institutions in the field of Swiss historiography (2019) 0.01 
    0.011266903 = product of:
  0.05257888 = sum of:
    0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 5272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02018744 = score(doc=5272,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 5272, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5272)
    0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 5272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02018744 = score(doc=5272,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 5272, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5272)
    0.0122040035 = product of:
      0.024408007 = sum of:
        0.024408007 = weight(_text_:22 in 5272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024408007 = score(doc=5272,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5272, 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=5272)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Date
    30. 5.2019 19:22:49
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 57(2019) no.1, S.24-36
  18. Riley, J.: Understanding metadata : what is metadata, and what is it for? (2017) 0.01 
    0.009613066 = product of:
  0.06729146 = sum of:
    0.03364573 = weight(_text_:classification in 2005) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03364573 = score(doc=2005,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.35186368 = fieldWeight in 2005, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2005)
    0.03364573 = weight(_text_:classification in 2005) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03364573 = score(doc=2005,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.35186368 = fieldWeight in 2005, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2005)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Footnote
    Rez. in: Cataloging and classification quarterly 55(2017) no.7/8, S.669-670 (Liz Woolcott).
  19. Willis, C.; Greenberg, J.; White, H.: Analysis and synthesis of metadata goals for scientific data (2012) 0.01 
    0.008343249 = product of:
  0.05840274 = sum of:
    0.050266735 = product of:
      0.10053347 = sum of:
        0.10053347 = weight(_text_:schemes in 367) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10053347 = score(doc=367,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.16067243 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.6257046 = fieldWeight in 367, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=367)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.008136002 = product of:
      0.016272005 = sum of:
        0.016272005 = weight(_text_:22 in 367) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016272005 = score(doc=367,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 367, 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=367)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    The proliferation of discipline-specific metadata schemes contributes to artificial barriers that can impede interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research. The authors considered this problem by examining the domains, objectives, and architectures of nine metadata schemes used to document scientific data in the physical, life, and social sciences. They used a mixed-methods content analysis and Greenberg's () metadata objectives, principles, domains, and architectural layout (MODAL) framework, and derived 22 metadata-related goals from textual content describing each metadata scheme. Relationships are identified between the domains (e.g., scientific discipline and type of data) and the categories of scheme objectives. For each strong correlation (>0.6), a Fisher's exact test for nonparametric data was used to determine significance (p < .05). Significant relationships were found between the domains and objectives of the schemes. Schemes describing observational data are more likely to have "scheme harmonization" (compatibility and interoperability with related schemes) as an objective; schemes with the objective "abstraction" (a conceptual model exists separate from the technical implementation) also have the objective "sufficiency" (the scheme defines a minimal amount of information to meet the needs of the community); and schemes with the objective "data publication" do not have the objective "element refinement." The analysis indicates that many metadata-driven goals expressed by communities are independent of scientific discipline or the type of data, although they are constrained by historical community practices and workflows as well as the technological environment at the time of scheme creation. The analysis reveals 11 fundamental metadata goals for metadata documenting scientific data in support of sharing research data across disciplines and domains. The authors report these results and highlight the need for more metadata-related research, particularly in the context of recent funding agency policy changes.
  20. Welhouse, Z.; Lee, J.H.; Bancroft, J.: "What am I fighting for?" : creating a controlled vocabulary for video game plot metadata (2015) 0.01 
    0.008156957 = product of:
  0.057098698 = sum of:
    0.028549349 = weight(_text_:classification in 2015) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028549349 = score(doc=2015,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.29856625 = fieldWeight in 2015, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2015)
    0.028549349 = weight(_text_:classification in 2015) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028549349 = score(doc=2015,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.29856625 = fieldWeight in 2015, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2015)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    A video game's plot is one of its defining features, and prior research confirms the importance of plot metadata to users through persona analysis, interviews, and surveys. However, existing organizational systems, including library catalogs, game-related websites, and traditional plot classification systems, do not adequately describe the plot information of video games, in other words, what the game is really about. We attempt to address the issue by creating a controlled vocabulary based on a domain analysis involving a review of relevant literature and existing data structures. The controlled vocabulary is constructed in a pair structure for maximizing flexibility and extensibility. Adopting this controlled vocabulary for describing plot information of games will allow for useful search and collocation of video games.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 53(2015) no.2, S.157-189

Authors

Languages

  • e 65
  • d 3
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 58
  • el 9
  • m 8
  • s 2
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications