Search (162 results, page 1 of 9)

0.024107104 = product of:
  0.12053552 = sum of:
    0.12053552 = weight(_text_:inc in 2541) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12053552 = score(doc=2541,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2573945 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0549803 = idf(docFreq=281, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042509552 = queryNorm
        0.46829098 = fieldWeight in 2541, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0549803 = idf(docFreq=281, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2541)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Footnote

Part of an issue devoted to 'Experimentation and collaboration: creating series for a new millenium', part 1, Proceedings of the North American Serials Interest Group, Inc.'s 12th annual conference, 29 May - 1 June 1997, University of Michigan Ann Arbor, Michigan. Contribution to Issues Session 1, at which members from several CONSER institutions discussed their experiences with the CONSER program's interim guidelines for cataloguing remote access versions of print serials

0.021229122 = product of:
  0.106145605 = sum of:
    0.106145605 = sum of:
      0.07158886 = weight(_text_:management in 4748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07158886 = score(doc=4748,freq=10.0), product of:
          0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.49963182 = fieldWeight in 4748, product of:
            3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
              10.0 = termFreq=10.0
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4748)
      0.034556746 = weight(_text_:22 in 4748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034556746 = score(doc=4748,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14886121 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = 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)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

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

0.016793938 = product of:
  0.041984845 = sum of:
    0.034438718 = weight(_text_:inc in 339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034438718 = score(doc=339,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2573945 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0549803 = idf(docFreq=281, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042509552 = queryNorm
        0.13379742 = fieldWeight in 339, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0549803 = idf(docFreq=281, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=339)
    0.007546128 = product of:
      0.015092256 = sum of:
        0.015092256 = weight(_text_:management in 339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015092256 = score(doc=339,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = queryNorm
            0.10533164 = fieldWeight in 339, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=339)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Footnote

Other selected specialized metadata element sets or schemas, such as Government Information Locator Service (GILS), are presented. Attention is brought to the different sets of elements and the need for linking up these elements across metadata schemes from a semantic point of view. It is no surprise, then, that after the presentation of additional specialized sets of metadata from the educational community and the arts sector, attention is turned to the discussion of Crosswalks between metadata element sets or the mapping of one metadata standard to another. Finally, the five appendices detailing elements found in Dublin Core, GILS, ARIADNE versions 3 and 3. 1, and Categories for the Description of Works of Art are an excellent addition to this chapter's focus on metadata and communities of practice. Chapters 3-6 provide an up-to-date account of the use of metadata standards in Libraries from the point of view of a community of practice. Some of the content standards included in these four chapters are AACR2, Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), and Library of Congress Subject Classification. In addition, uses of MARC along with planned implementations of the archival community's encoding scheme, EAD, are covered in detail. In a way, content in these chapters can be considered as a refresher course on the history, current state, importance, and usefulness of the above-mentioned standards in Libraries. Application of the standards is offered for various types of materials, such as monographic materials, continuing resources, and integrating library metadata into local catalogs and databases. A review of current digital library projects takes place in Chapter 7. While details about these projects tend to become out of date fast, the sections on issues and problems encountered in digital projects and successes and failures deserve any reader's close inspection. A suggested model is important enough to merit a specific mention below, in a short list format, as it encapsulates lessons learned from issues, problems, successes, and failures in digital projects. Before detailing the model, however, the various projects included in Chapter 7 should be mentioned. The projects are: Colorado Digitization Project, Cooperative Online Resource Catalog (an Office of Research project by OCLC, Inc.), California Digital Library, JSTOR, LC's National Digital Library Program and VARIATIONS.

LCSH

Electronic information resources / Management

Subject

Electronic information resources / Management

0.013314451 = product of:
  0.06657226 = sum of:
    0.06657226 = sum of:
      0.03201551 = weight(_text_:management in 2644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03201551 = score(doc=2644,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 2644, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2644)
      0.034556746 = weight(_text_:22 in 2644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034556746 = score(doc=2644,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14886121 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2644, 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=2644)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Although the issue of metadata quality is recognized as an important topic within the metadata research community, the cultural heritage sector has been slow to develop methodologies, guidelines and tools for addressing this topic in practice. This paper concentrates on metadata quality specifically within the museum sector and describes the potential of data-profiling techniques for metadata quality evaluation. A case study illustrates the application of a generalpurpose data-profiling tool on a large collection of metadata records from an ethnographic collection. After an analysis of the results of the case-study the paper reviews further steps in our research and presents the implementation of a metadata quality tool within an open-source collection management software.

Source

Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas

0.011095377 = product of:
  0.05547688 = sum of:
    0.05547688 = sum of:
      0.02667959 = weight(_text_:management in 2649) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02667959 = score(doc=2649,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 2649, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2649)
      0.02879729 = weight(_text_:22 in 2649) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02879729 = score(doc=2649,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14886121 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2649, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2649)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

OCLC's Crosswalk Web Service (Godby, Smith and Childress, 2008) formalizes the notion of crosswalk, as defined in Gill,et al. (n.d.), by hiding technical details and permitting the semantic equivalences to emerge as the centerpiece. One outcome is that metadata experts, who are typically not programmers, can enter the translation logic into a spreadsheet that can be automatically converted into executable code. In this paper, we describe the implementation of the Dublin Core Terms application profile in the management of crosswalks involving MARC. A crosswalk that encodes an application profile extends the typical format with two columns: one that annotates the namespace to which an element belongs, and one that annotates a 'broader-narrower' relation between a pair of elements, such as Dublin Core coverage and Dublin Core Terms spatial. This information is sufficient to produce scripts written in OCLC's Semantic Equivalence Expression Language (or Seel), which are called from the Crosswalk Web Service to generate production-grade translations. With its focus on elements that can be mixed, matched, added, and redefined, the application profile (Heery and Patel, 2000) is a natural fit with the translation model of the Crosswalk Web Service, which attempts to achieve interoperability by mapping one pair of elements at a time.

Source

Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas

0.01056458 = product of:
  0.052822895 = sum of:
    0.052822895 = product of:
      0.10564579 = sum of:
        0.10564579 = weight(_text_:management in 1915) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10564579 = score(doc=1915,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = queryNorm
            0.73732144 = fieldWeight in 1915, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1915)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

Information management report. 1999, Dec., S.16-18

Theme

Information Resources Management

0.009774125 = product of:
  0.048870623 = sum of:
    0.048870623 = product of:
      0.097741246 = sum of:
        0.097741246 = weight(_text_:22 in 5743) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.097741246 = score(doc=5743,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.14886121 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = 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)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

30. 3.2002 19:45:22

Source

Revista Española de Documentaçion Cientifica. 22(1999) no.2, S.198-219

0.009215132 = product of:
  0.04607566 = sum of:
    0.04607566 = product of:
      0.09215132 = sum of:
        0.09215132 = weight(_text_:22 in 4899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09215132 = score(doc=4899,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14886121 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = 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)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

16. 7.2000 20:58:22

0.009215132 = product of:
  0.04607566 = sum of:
    0.04607566 = product of:
      0.09215132 = sum of:
        0.09215132 = weight(_text_:22 in 2840) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09215132 = score(doc=2840,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14886121 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = 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)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1

0.008537469 = product of:
  0.042687345 = sum of:
    0.042687345 = product of:
      0.08537469 = sum of:
        0.08537469 = weight(_text_:management in 4556) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08537469 = score(doc=4556,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = queryNorm
            0.5958457 = fieldWeight in 4556, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4556)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Metadata is a term to describe the information required to documents the characteristics of information contained within databases. Describes the elements that make up metadata. A number of software tools exist to help apply document management principles to electronic records but they have, so far, been inadequately applied. Describes 2 initiative currently under way to develop software to automate many records management functions. Understanding document management principles as applied to electronic records are vital to records managers

Source

Records management quarterly. 29(1995) no.4, S.53-55

0.008063241 = product of:
  0.0403162 = sum of:
    0.0403162 = product of:
      0.0806324 = sum of:
        0.0806324 = weight(_text_:22 in 4407) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0806324 = score(doc=4407,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14886121 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = 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)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

28. 3.2002 9:22:34

0.008063241 = product of:
  0.0403162 = sum of:
    0.0403162 = product of:
      0.0806324 = sum of:
        0.0806324 = weight(_text_:22 in 7196) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0806324 = score(doc=7196,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14886121 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = 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)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1

0.008063241 = product of:
  0.0403162 = sum of:
    0.0403162 = product of:
      0.0806324 = sum of:
        0.0806324 = weight(_text_:22 in 2841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0806324 = score(doc=2841,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14886121 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = 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)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2

0.0077667623 = product of:
  0.038833812 = sum of:
    0.038833812 = sum of:
      0.018675713 = weight(_text_:management in 2668) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.018675713 = score(doc=2668,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.13034125 = fieldWeight in 2668, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2668)
      0.0201581 = weight(_text_:22 in 2668) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0201581 = score(doc=2668,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14886121 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 2668, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2668)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Metadata is a key aspect of our evolving infrastructure for information management, social computing, and scientific collaboration. DC-2008 will focus on metadata challenges, solutions, and innovation in initiatives and activities underlying semantic and social applications. Metadata is part of the fabric of social computing, which includes the use of wikis, blogs, and tagging for collaboration and participation. Metadata also underlies the development of semantic applications, and the Semantic Web - the representation and integration of multimedia knowledge structures on the basis of semantic models. These two trends flow together in applications such as Wikipedia, where authors collectively create structured information that can be extracted and used to enhance access to and use of information sources. Recent discussion has focused on how existing bibliographic standards can be expressed as Semantic Web vocabularies to facilitate the ingration of library and cultural heritage data with other types of data. Harnessing the efforts of content providers and end-users to link, tag, edit, and describe their information in interoperable ways ("participatory metadata") is a key step towards providing knowledge environments that are scalable, self-correcting, and evolvable. DC-2008 will explore conceptual and practical issues in the development and deployment of semantic and social applications to meet the needs of specific communities of practice.

0.007546128 = product of:
  0.037730638 = sum of:
    0.037730638 = product of:
      0.075461276 = sum of:
        0.075461276 = weight(_text_:management in 2363) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.075461276 = score(doc=2363,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = queryNorm
            0.5266582 = fieldWeight in 2363, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2363)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Reports on a research study, conducted at the Department of Information and Library Studies, Loughborough University, to investigate the potential of metadata for universal data management and explore the attitudes of UK information professionals to these issues

0.0069113495 = product of:
  0.034556746 = sum of:
    0.034556746 = product of:
      0.06911349 = sum of:
        0.06911349 = weight(_text_:22 in 6048) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06911349 = score(doc=6048,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14886121 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = 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)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 9.2007 15:41:14

0.0065160827 = product of:
  0.032580413 = sum of:
    0.032580413 = product of:
      0.065160826 = sum of:
        0.065160826 = weight(_text_:22 in 2408) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.065160826 = score(doc=2408,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.14886121 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = 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)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

13. 1.2007 18:31:22

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) nos.3/4, S.43-58

0.0065160827 = product of:
  0.032580413 = sum of:
    0.032580413 = product of:
      0.065160826 = sum of:
        0.065160826 = weight(_text_:22 in 2845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.065160826 = score(doc=2845,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.14886121 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = 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)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

9.12.2005 19:22:38

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.175-181

0.006469458 = product of:
  0.032347288 = sum of:
    0.032347288 = product of:
      0.064694576 = sum of:
        0.064694576 = weight(_text_:management in 4202) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.064694576 = score(doc=4202,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = queryNorm
            0.45151538 = fieldWeight in 4202, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4202)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Dieser Artikel stellt ein konzeptionelles Metadatenmodell vor, das auf Records verschiedener Medientypen anwendbar ist. Organisationen, die im Zuge ihrer Tätigkeit regelmäßig sowohl textbasierte als auch audiovisuelle Records erstellen, haben beide Medien im Sinne des Records Management zu verwalten. Dazu sind Metadaten, einschließlich der des zentralen Ordnungssystems für Records, ein Hauptwerkzeug. Inspiriert durch medienübergreifende, auf gemeinsamen Zugriff ausgerichtete Metadatenmodelle, wird ein neues Modell vorgeschlagen. Es kombiniert die hierarchische Abstraktion der existierenden Modelle mit den Prinzipien des Records Management. Das Modell kann Organisationen dabei helfen, Entscheidungen über Metadaten für ihre Records zu treffen.

0.006403102 = product of:
  0.03201551 = sum of:
    0.03201551 = product of:
      0.06403102 = sum of:
        0.06403102 = weight(_text_:management in 4633) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06403102 = score(doc=4633,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = queryNorm
            0.44688427 = fieldWeight in 4633, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4633)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)