Search (95 results, page 1 of 5)

  • × theme_ss:"Metadaten"
  1. Garrison, W.A.: ¬The Colorado Digitization Project : subject access issues (2003) 0.01 
    0.014732054 = product of:
  0.117856435 = sum of:
    0.117856435 = weight(_text_:union in 3955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.117856435 = score(doc=3955,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.18718043 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.756716 = idf(docFreq=379, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032515142 = queryNorm
        0.6296408 = fieldWeight in 3955, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.756716 = idf(docFreq=379, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3955)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Abstract
    The Colorado Digitization Project (CDP), begun in the fall of 1998, is a collaborative initiative that involves Colorado's archives, historical societies, libraries, and museums. The project is creating a union catalogue of metadata records and is investigating the use of Dewey Decimal Classification numbers through WebDewey to allow linkage of general subject terms and highly specialized subject terms within a subject browse feature of the union catalogue.
  2. Panskus, E.J.: Metadaten zur Identifizierung von Falschmeldungen im digitalen Raum : eine praktische Annäherung (2019) 0.01 
    0.011905298 = product of:
  0.09524238 = sum of:
    0.09524238 = weight(_text_:union in 5452) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09524238 = score(doc=5452,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18718043 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.756716 = idf(docFreq=379, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032515142 = queryNorm
        0.5088266 = fieldWeight in 5452, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.756716 = idf(docFreq=379, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5452)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Abstract
    In vielen Ländern erstarken populistische und rassistische Kräfte. Mit Polen und Ungarn schwächen selbst Mitglieder der Europäischen Union rechtsstaatliche Institutionen.[1] Die Türkei wendet sich immer stärker von der EU ab und driftet an den Rand einer Diktatur. In Österreich konnte ein Rechtspopulist nur knapp als Bundespräsident verhindert werden. All diese Ereignisse finden oder fanden auch wegen Missmut und Misstrauen gegenüber staatlichen und etablierten Institutionen wie klassischen Medien, Regierungen und der Wirtschaft statt.
  3. Werf-Davelaar, T.v.d.: ¬De bibliografische beschrijving van elektronische informatiebronnen : 2 (1997) 0.01 
    0.010417135 = product of:
  0.08333708 = sum of:
    0.08333708 = weight(_text_:union in 7395) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08333708 = score(doc=7395,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18718043 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.756716 = idf(docFreq=379, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032515142 = queryNorm
        0.44522327 = fieldWeight in 7395, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.756716 = idf(docFreq=379, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7395)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Abstract
    As the number of publications on the WWW grows exponentially there is an urgent need for a standardised system of bibliographic description. In the Netherlands the PICA national union catalogue has created WebCAT to catalogue online publications from universities and research institutes. However, use of WebCAT is restricted to participating institutions. The DutchESS (Dutch Electronic Subject Service) and SURF-ACE Search Enginges projects provide a partial solution to the problems on indexing online publications. The ultimate solution lies in the development of standardised metadata architecture
  4. Cole, T.W..: Using OAI : innovations in the sharing of information (2003) 0.01 
    0.008928973 = product of:
  0.071431786 = sum of:
    0.071431786 = weight(_text_:union in 4766) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.071431786 = score(doc=4766,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18718043 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.756716 = idf(docFreq=379, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032515142 = queryNorm
        0.38161996 = fieldWeight in 4766, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.756716 = idf(docFreq=379, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4766)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Abstract
    The tradition of union catalogs and similar broad-based, comprehensive bibliographic utilities and tools is one of long standing in the discipline of librarianship. As we move towards greater reliance on digital primary sources, the sharing of information about what we hold in our digital collections intuitively seems of increasing import and value as a way to organize and manage the explosion of online information resources. The Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting enables effective and efficient sharing of digital metadata and is being utilized across a wide spectrum of disciplines and digital library projects. Experience to date gives reason for optimism and provides evidence and confirmation that, even as the technologies we use evolve, the intellectual framework of our tradition persists and continues to be relevant.
  5. Zavalina, O.L.: Complementarity in subject metadata in large-scale digital libraries : a comparative analysis (2014) 0.01 
    0.008928973 = product of:
  0.071431786 = sum of:
    0.071431786 = weight(_text_:union in 1972) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.071431786 = score(doc=1972,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18718043 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.756716 = idf(docFreq=379, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032515142 = queryNorm
        0.38161996 = fieldWeight in 1972, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.756716 = idf(docFreq=379, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1972)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    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.
  6. Gömpel, R.; Altenhöner, R.; Kunz, M.; Oehlschläger, S.; Werner, C.: Weltkongress Bibliothek und Information, 70. IFLA-Generalkonferenz in Buenos Aires : Aus den Veranstaltungen der Division IV Bibliographic Control, der Core Activities ICABS und UNIMARC sowie der Information Technology Section (2004) 0.01 
    0.007596463 = product of:
  0.030385852 = sum of:
    0.025980499 = weight(_text_:wissensmanagement in 2874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025980499 = score(doc=2874,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19552355 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0133076 = idf(docFreq=293, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032515142 = queryNorm
        0.13287657 = fieldWeight in 2874, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0133076 = idf(docFreq=293, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2874)
    0.0044053528 = product of:
      0.0088107055 = sum of:
        0.0088107055 = weight(_text_:22 in 2874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0088107055 = score(doc=2874,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113862485 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032515142 = queryNorm
            0.07738023 = fieldWeight in 2874, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2874)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    "Libraries: Tools for Education and Development" war das Motto der 70. IFLA-Generalkonferenz, dem Weltkongress Bibliothek und Information, der vom 22.-27. August 2004 in Buenos Aires, Argentinien, und damit erstmals in Lateinamerika stattfand. Rund 3.000 Teilnehmerinnen und Teilnehmer, davon ein Drittel aus spanischsprachigen Ländern, allein 600 aus Argentinien, besuchten die von der IFLA und dem nationalen Organisationskomitee gut organisierte Tagung mit mehr als 200 Sitzungen und Veranstaltungen. Aus Deutschland waren laut Teilnehmerverzeichnis leider nur 45 Kolleginnen und Kollegen angereist, womit ihre Zahl wieder auf das Niveau von Boston gesunken ist. Erfreulicherweise gab es nunmehr bereits im dritten Jahr eine deutschsprachige Ausgabe des IFLA-Express. Auch in diesem Jahr soll hier über die Veranstaltungen der Division IV Bibliographic Control berichtet werden. Die Arbeit der Division mit ihren Sektionen Bibliography, Cataloguing, Classification and Indexing sowie der neuen Sektion Knowledge Management bildet einen der Schwerpunkte der IFLA-Arbeit, die dabei erzielten konkreten Ergebnisse und Empfehlungen haben maßgeblichen Einfluss auf die tägliche Arbeit der Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare. Erstmals wird auch ausführlich über die Arbeit der Core Activities ICABS und UNIMARC und der Information Technology Section berichtet.
    Content
    Knowledge Management Section (Sektion Wissensmanagement) Ziel der neuen Sektion ist es, die Entwicklung und Implementierung des Wissensmanagements in Bibliotheken und Informationszentren zu fördern. Die Sektion will dafür eine internationale Plattform für die professionelle Kommunikation bieten und damit das Thema bekannter und allgemein verständlicher machen. Auf diese Weise soll seine Bedeutung auch für Bibliotheken und die mit ihm arbeitenden Einrichtungen herausgestellt werden. IFLA-CDNL Alliance for Bibliographic Standards (ICABS) Ein Jahr nach ihrer Gründung in Berlin hat die IFLA Core Activity "IFLA-CDNL Alliance for Bibliographic Standards (ICABS)" in Buenos Aires zum ersten Mal das Spektrum ihrer Arbeitsfelder einem großen Fachpublikum vorgestellt. Die IFLA Core Activity UNIMARC, einer der Partner der Allianz, hatte am Donnerstagvormittag zu einer Veranstaltung unter dem Titel "The holdings record as a bibliographic control tool" geladen. Am Nachmittag des selben Tages fand unter dem Titel "The new IFLA-CDNL Alliance for Bibliographic Standards - umbrella for multifaceted activities: strategies and practical ways to improve international coordination" die umfassende ICABS-Veranstaltung statt, die von der Generaldirektorin Der Deutschen Bibliothek, Dr. Elisabeth Niggemann, moderiert wurde. Nachdem die Vorsitzende des Advisory Board in ihrem Vortrag auf die Entstehungsgeschichte der Allianz eingegangen war, gab sie einen kurzen Oberblick über die Organisation und die Arbeit von ICABS als Dach der vielfältigen Aktivitäten im Bereich bibliographischer Standards. Vertreter aller in ICABS zusammengeschlossener Bibliotheken stellten im Anschluss daran ihre Arbeitsbereiche und -ergebnisse vor.
  7. Thurman, A.C.: Metadata standards for archival control : an introduction to EAD and EAC (2005) 0.01 
    0.0074408115 = product of:
  0.059526492 = sum of:
    0.059526492 = weight(_text_:union in 5733) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.059526492 = score(doc=5733,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18718043 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.756716 = idf(docFreq=379, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032515142 = queryNorm
        0.31801665 = fieldWeight in 5733, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.756716 = idf(docFreq=379, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5733)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Abstract
    The goal of cataloging is to provide maximum access to organized information. Archival materials-the unique, unpublished byproducts of the everyday activities of organizations, families, or individuals-are valuable information resources that have been difficult to integrate into the rapidly consolidating bibliographic universe. The formal introduction of Encoded Archival Description (EAD) Version 1.0 in 1998 provided archivists with a powerful tool for overcoming this difficulty. EAD enables the encoding of archival finding aids into records that are platform-independent, machine-readable, and fully searchable, helping to standardize archival descriptive practices while increasing our progress toward union access to archival materials. The related new metadata scheme Encoded Archival Context (EAC) goes further, allowing archivists to encode information about the creators and context of creation of archival materials, and to make that information available to users as an independent resource separate from individual finding aids. This article presents an overview of the role of these metadata standards in the achievement of archival control, featuring a concise guide to the structure and use of EAD (Version 2002) and an introduction to the emerging EAC standard.
  8. Baker, T.; Dekkers, M.: Identifying metadata elements with URIs : The CORES resolution (2003) 0.01 
    0.005952649 = product of:
  0.04762119 = sum of:
    0.04762119 = weight(_text_:union in 1199) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04762119 = score(doc=1199,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18718043 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.756716 = idf(docFreq=379, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032515142 = queryNorm
        0.2544133 = fieldWeight in 1199, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.756716 = idf(docFreq=379, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1199)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Abstract
    On 18 November 2002, at a meeting organised by the CORES Project (Information Society Technologies Programme, European Union), several organisations regarded as maintenance authorities for metadata elements achieved consensus on a resolution to assign Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs) to metadata elements as a useful first step towards the development of mapping infrastructures and interoperability services. The signatories of the CORES Resolution agreed to promote this consensus in their communities and beyond and to implement an action plan in the following six months. Six months having passed, the maintainers of GILS, ONIX, MARC 21, CERIF, DOI, IEEE/LOM, and Dublin Core report on their implementations of the resolution and highlight issues of relevance to establishing good-practice conventions for declaring, identifying, and maintaining metadata elements more generally. In June 2003, the resolution was also endorsed by the maintainers of UNIMARC. The "Resolution on Metadata Element Identifiers", or CORES Resolution, is an agreement among the maintenance organisations for several major metadata standards - GILS, ONIX, MARC 21, UNIMARC, CERIF, DOI®, IEEE/LOM, and Dublin Core - to identify their metadata elements using Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs). The Uniform Resource Identifier, defined in the IETF RFC 2396 as "a compact string of characters for identifying an abstract or physical resource", has been promoted for use as a universal form of identification by the World Wide Web Consortium. The CORES Resolution, formulated at a meeting organised by the European project CORES in November 2002, included a commitment to publicise the consensus statement to a wider audience of metadata standards initiatives and to implement key points of the agreement within the following six months - specifically, to define URI assignment mechanisms, assign URIs to elements, and formulate policies for the persistence of those URIs. This article marks the passage of six months by reporting on progress made in implementing this common action plan. After presenting the text of the CORES Resolution and its three "clarifications", the article summarises the position of each signatory organisation towards assigning URIs to its metadata elements, noting any practical or strategic problems that may have emerged. These progress reports were based on input from Thomas Baker, José Borbinha, Eliot Christian, Erik Duval, Keith Jeffery, Rebecca Guenther, and Norman Paskin. The article closes with a few general observations about these first steps towards the clarification of shared conventions for the identification of metadata elements and perhaps, one can hope, towards the ultimate goal of improving interoperability among a diversity of metadata communities.
  9. Handbook of metadata, semantics and ontologies (2014) 0.01 
    0.0054676095 = product of:
  0.043740876 = sum of:
    0.043740876 = product of:
      0.08748175 = sum of:
        0.08748175 = weight(_text_:aufsatzsammlung in 5134) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08748175 = score(doc=5134,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.21333472 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032515142 = queryNorm
            0.41006804 = fieldWeight in 5134, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5134)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    RSWK
    Metadaten / Ontologie <Wissensverarbeitung> / Aufsatzsammlung
    Subject
    Metadaten / Ontologie <Wissensverarbeitung> / Aufsatzsammlung
  10. Baker, T.; Fischer, T.: Bericht von der Dublin-Core-Konferenz (DC-2005) in Madrid (2005) 0.00 
    0.0048713437 = product of:
  0.03897075 = sum of:
    0.03897075 = weight(_text_:wissensmanagement in 4872) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03897075 = score(doc=4872,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19552355 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0133076 = idf(docFreq=293, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032515142 = queryNorm
        0.19931486 = fieldWeight in 4872, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0133076 = idf(docFreq=293, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=4872)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Content
    "1. Die Konferenz Vom 12. bis 15. September 2005 fand in Leganés (Madrid) die "International Conference an Dublin Core and Metadata Applications" mit dem Thema "Vocabularies in Practice" statt [DC2005]. Gastgeber war der Fachbereich Bibliothekswesen und Dokumentation der "Universidad Carlos III de Madrid" zusammen mit dem Institut "Agustin Millares" für Dokumentation und Wissensmanagement. Den 214 Teilnehmern aus 33 Ländern wurden 14 ausführliche und 18 Kurzpräsentationen geboten sowie zehn "Special Sessions" [DC2005-PAPERS]. Fünf Einführungsseminare zu Themen der Metadaten und maschinell verarbeitbarer Thesauri wurden abgehalten. Die Hauptreden der vier Konferenztage wurden von Thomas Baker (Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Göttingen), Ricardo Baeza (University of Chile), Johannes Keizer (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations) und Eric Miller (World Wide Web Consortium) gehalten. Plenarvorträge wurden simultan ins Spanische übersetzt und mehrere Treffen wurden in französischer oder spanischer Sprache abgehalten. Die Dublin-Core-Konferenz ist auch das zentrale Ereignis des Jahres für die Dublin Core Metadata Initiative (DCMI) als Organisation. Vor und nach der Konferenz tagten das DCMI Board of Trustees, ein Gremium aus Metadatenexperten und nationalen Vertretern ("Affiliates"); das "Usage Board", das den Standard inhaltlich verwaltet, und das "Advisory Board", das hauptsächlich aus Leitern von DCMI-Arbeitsgruppen besteht. Während der Konferenz haben sich vierzehn Arbeitsgruppen zu speziellen Fragen im Bereich Metadaten getroffen. 2. Von der Kernsemantik zum Modell "Zehn Jahre Dublin Core" war der Hintergrund für die Keynote-Präsehtation von Thomas Baker, DCMI Director of Specifications and Documentation. März 1995 fand in Dublin (Ohio) der Workshop statt, auf dem die Kernelemente erstmals entworfen wurden - Creator, Subject, Date, usw. - die der Initiative den Namen gegeben haben. Dieser "Dublin Core" wurde 1998 bei der Internet Engineering Task Force als Request for Comments (RFC 2413) publiziert, 2000 formal als Standard in Europa (CWA 13874/2000 bei CEN), 2001 in den USA (Z39.95 bei NISO) und 2003 international (ISO 15836/2003) anerkannt [DUBLINCORE]. Am Anfang wurde der Dublin Core als Datenformat konzipiert - d.h. als streng festgelegte Vorlage für digitale Karteikarten. Bereits früh wurden die Elemente jedoch als Vokabular aufgefasst, d.h. als Satz prinzipiell rekombinierbarer Elemente für Beschreibungen, die den Anforderungen spezifischer Anwendungsbereiche angepasst werden konnten - kurz, als Bausteine für Anwendungsprofile. Ausgehend von der vermeintlich simplen Aufgabe, Webseiten auf einfache Art zu beschreiben, hat sich ab 1997 in gegenseitiger Beeinflussung mit der sich entwickelnden Webtechnik von HTML bis hin zu XML und RDF ein allgemeines Modell für Metadaten herauskristallisiert.
  11. Jimenez, V.O.R.: Nuevas perspectivas para la catalogacion : metadatos ver MARC (1999) 0.00 
    0.0046725827 = product of:
  0.03738066 = sum of:
    0.03738066 = product of:
      0.07476132 = sum of:
        0.07476132 = weight(_text_:22 in 5743) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07476132 = score(doc=5743,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.113862485 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032515142 = 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)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Date
    30. 3.2002 19:45:22
    Source
    Revista Española de Documentaçion Cientifica. 22(1999) no.2, S.198-219
  12. Söhler, M.: "Dumm wie Google" war gestern : semantische Suche im Netz (2011) 0.00 
    0.0044343974 = product of:
  0.03547518 = sum of:
    0.03547518 = weight(_text_:unternehmen in 4440) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03547518 = score(doc=4440,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17271045 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.3116927 = idf(docFreq=592, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032515142 = queryNorm
        0.20540263 = fieldWeight in 4440, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.3116927 = idf(docFreq=592, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4440)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Content
    - "Gemeinsames Format für strukturierte Daten" Aber warum sollten Google, Yahoo und Bing plötzlich zusammenarbeiten, wo doch bisher die Konkurrenz das Verhältnis prägte? Stefan Keuchel, Pressesprecher von Google Deutschland, betont, alle beteiligten Unternehmen wollten "ein deutliches Zeichen setzen, um die Qualität der Suche zu verbessern". Man entwickele "ein gemeinsames Format für strukturierte Daten, mit dem Dinge ermöglicht werden, die heute noch nicht möglich sind - Stichwort: semantische Suche". Die Ergebnisse aus Schema.org würden "zeitnah" in die Suchmaschine integriert, "denn einen Zeitplan" gebe es nicht. "Erst mit der Einigung auf eine gemeinsame Sprache können Suchmaschinen einen Mehrwert durch semantische Technologien generieren", antwortet Daniel Bahls auf die Frage nach Gemeinsamkeit und Konkurrenz der Suchmaschinen. Er weist außerdem darauf hin, dass es bereits die semantische Suchmaschine Sig.ma gibt. Geschwindigkeit und Menge der Ergebnisse nach einer Suchanfrage spielen hier keine Rolle. Sig.ma sammelt seine Informationen allein im Bereich des semantischen Webs und listet nach einer Anfrage alles Bekannte strukturiert auf."
  13. Andresen, L.: Metadata in Denmark (2000) 0.00 
    0.0044053528 = product of:
  0.035242822 = sum of:
    0.035242822 = product of:
      0.070485644 = sum of:
        0.070485644 = weight(_text_:22 in 4899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.070485644 = score(doc=4899,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113862485 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032515142 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 4899, 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=4899)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Date
    16. 7.2000 20:58:22
  14. MARC and metadata : METS, MODS, and MARCXML: current and future implications (2004) 0.00 
    0.0044053528 = product of:
  0.035242822 = sum of:
    0.035242822 = product of:
      0.070485644 = sum of:
        0.070485644 = weight(_text_:22 in 2840) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.070485644 = score(doc=2840,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113862485 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032515142 = 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)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1
  15. Moen, W.E.: ¬The metadata approach to accessing government information (2001) 0.00 
    0.0038546836 = product of:
  0.030837469 = sum of:
    0.030837469 = product of:
      0.061674938 = sum of:
        0.061674938 = weight(_text_:22 in 4407) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.061674938 = score(doc=4407,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113862485 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032515142 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4407, 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=4407)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Date
    28. 3.2002 9:22:34
  16. MARC and metadata : METS, MODS, and MARCXML: current and future implications (2004) 0.00 
    0.0038546836 = product of:
  0.030837469 = sum of:
    0.030837469 = product of:
      0.061674938 = sum of:
        0.061674938 = weight(_text_:22 in 7196) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.061674938 = score(doc=7196,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113862485 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032515142 = 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)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1
  17. MARC and metadata : METS, MODS, and MARCXML: current and future implications part 2 (2004) 0.00 
    0.0038546836 = product of:
  0.030837469 = sum of:
    0.030837469 = product of:
      0.061674938 = sum of:
        0.061674938 = weight(_text_:22 in 2841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.061674938 = score(doc=2841,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113862485 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032515142 = 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)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2
  18. Broughton, V.: Automatic metadata generation : Digital resource description without human intervention (2007) 0.00 
    0.0033040144 = product of:
  0.026432116 = sum of:
    0.026432116 = product of:
      0.05286423 = sum of:
        0.05286423 = weight(_text_:22 in 6048) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05286423 = score(doc=6048,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113862485 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032515142 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6048, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6048)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Date
    22. 9.2007 15:41:14
  19. Caplan, P.; Guenther, R.: Metadata for Internet resources : the Dublin Core Metadata Elements Set and its mapping to USMARC (1996) 0.00 
    0.003115055 = product of:
  0.02492044 = sum of:
    0.02492044 = product of:
      0.04984088 = sum of:
        0.04984088 = weight(_text_:22 in 2408) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04984088 = score(doc=2408,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.113862485 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032515142 = 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)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Date
    13. 1.2007 18:31:22
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) nos.3/4, S.43-58
  20. Tennant, R.: ¬A bibliographic metadata infrastructure for the twenty-first century (2004) 0.00 
    0.003115055 = product of:
  0.02492044 = sum of:
    0.02492044 = product of:
      0.04984088 = sum of:
        0.04984088 = weight(_text_:22 in 2845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04984088 = score(doc=2845,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.113862485 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032515142 = 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)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Date
    9.12.2005 19:22:38
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.175-181

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 80
  • d 12
  • nl 1
  • sp 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 87
  • el 8
  • s 6
  • m 3
  • b 2
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications