-
Johnson, B.C.: XML and MARC : which is "right"? (2001)
0.08
0.07658371 = product of:
0.15316743 = sum of:
0.045744486 = weight(_text_:world in 5423) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.045744486 = score(doc=5423,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1538826 = queryWeight, product of:
3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.29726875 = fieldWeight in 5423, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5423)
0.06078585 = weight(_text_:wide in 5423) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06078585 = score(doc=5423,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17738682 = queryWeight, product of:
4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.342674 = fieldWeight in 5423, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5423)
0.04663708 = weight(_text_:web in 5423) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04663708 = score(doc=5423,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.35694647 = fieldWeight in 5423, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5423)
0.5 = coord(3/6)
- Abstract
- This article explores recent discussions about appropriate mark-up conventions for library information intended for use on the World Wide Web. In particular, the question of whether the MARC 21 format will continue to be useful and whether the time is right for a full-fledged conversion effort to XML is explored. The author concludes that the MARC format will be relevant well into the future, and its use will not hamper access to bibliographic information via the web. Early XML exploratory efforts carried out at the Stanford University's Lane Medical Library are reported on. Although these efforts are a promising start, much more consultation and investigation is needed to arrive at broadly acceptable standards for XML library information encoding and retrieval.
-
Nix, M.: ¬Die praktische Einsetzbarkeit des CIDOC CRM in Informationssystemen im Bereich des Kulturerbes (2004)
0.07
0.07420542 = product of:
0.14841084 = sum of:
0.046208907 = weight(_text_:world in 3742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.046208907 = score(doc=3742,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1538826 = queryWeight, product of:
3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.30028677 = fieldWeight in 3742, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3742)
0.061402984 = weight(_text_:wide in 3742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.061402984 = score(doc=3742,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17738682 = queryWeight, product of:
4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.34615302 = fieldWeight in 3742, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3742)
0.040798947 = weight(_text_:web in 3742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040798947 = score(doc=3742,freq=6.0), product of:
0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.3122631 = fieldWeight in 3742, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3742)
0.5 = coord(3/6)
- Abstract
- Es steht uns eine praktisch unbegrenzte Menge an Informationen über das World Wide Web zur Verfügung. Das Problem, das daraus erwächst, ist, diese Menge zu bewältigen und an die Information zu gelangen, die im Augenblick benötigt wird. Das überwältigende Angebot zwingt sowohl professionelle Anwender als auch Laien zu suchen, ungeachtet ihrer Ansprüche an die gewünschten Informationen. Um dieses Suchen effizienter zu gestalten, gibt es einerseits die Möglichkeit, leistungsstärkere Suchmaschinen zu entwickeln. Eine andere Möglichkeit ist, Daten besser zu strukturieren, um an die darin enthaltenen Informationen zu gelangen. Hoch strukturierte Daten sind maschinell verarbeitbar, sodass ein Teil der Sucharbeit automatisiert werden kann. Das Semantic Web ist die Vision eines weiterentwickelten World Wide Web, in dem derart strukturierten Daten von so genannten Softwareagenten verarbeitet werden. Die fortschreitende inhaltliche Strukturierung von Daten wird Semantisierung genannt. Im ersten Teil der Arbeit sollen einige wichtige Methoden der inhaltlichen Strukturierung von Daten skizziert werden, um die Stellung von Ontologien innerhalb der Semantisierung zu klären. Im dritten Kapitel wird der Aufbau und die Aufgabe des CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model (CRM), einer Domain Ontologie im Bereich des Kulturerbes dargestellt. Im darauf folgenden praktischen Teil werden verschiedene Ansätze zur Verwendung des CRM diskutiert und umgesetzt. Es wird ein Vorschlag zur Implementierung des Modells in XML erarbeitet. Das ist eine Möglichkeit, die dem Datentransport dient. Außerdem wird der Entwurf einer Klassenbibliothek in Java dargelegt, auf die die Verarbeitung und Nutzung des Modells innerhalb eines Informationssystems aufbauen kann.
-
Cantrall, D.: From MARC to Mosaic : progressing toward data interchangeability at the Oregon State Archives (1994)
0.07
0.06975387 = product of:
0.13950774 = sum of:
0.045744486 = weight(_text_:world in 8470) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.045744486 = score(doc=8470,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1538826 = queryWeight, product of:
3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.29726875 = fieldWeight in 8470, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8470)
0.06078585 = weight(_text_:wide in 8470) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06078585 = score(doc=8470,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17738682 = queryWeight, product of:
4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.342674 = fieldWeight in 8470, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8470)
0.0329774 = weight(_text_:web in 8470) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0329774 = score(doc=8470,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.25239927 = fieldWeight in 8470, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8470)
0.5 = coord(3/6)
- Abstract
- Explains the technology used by the Oregon State Archives to relaize the goal of data interchangeability given the prescribed nature of the MARC format. Describes an emergent model of learning and information delivery focusing on the example of World Wide Web, accessed most often by the software client Mosaic, which is the fastest growing segment of the Internet information highway. Also describes The Data Magician, a flexible program which allows for many combinations of input and output formats, and will read unconventional formats such as MARC communications format. Oregon State Archives, using Mosaic and The Data Magician, are consequently able to present valuable electronic information to a variety of users
-
Oeltjen, W.: Dokumentenstrukturen manipulieren und visualisieren : über das Arbeiten mit der logischen Struktur (1998)
0.07
0.06975387 = product of:
0.13950774 = sum of:
0.045744486 = weight(_text_:world in 6616) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.045744486 = score(doc=6616,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1538826 = queryWeight, product of:
3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.29726875 = fieldWeight in 6616, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6616)
0.06078585 = weight(_text_:wide in 6616) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06078585 = score(doc=6616,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17738682 = queryWeight, product of:
4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.342674 = fieldWeight in 6616, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6616)
0.0329774 = weight(_text_:web in 6616) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0329774 = score(doc=6616,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.25239927 = fieldWeight in 6616, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6616)
0.5 = coord(3/6)
- Abstract
- Thema dieses Beitrages sind Dokumentenstrukturen und zwar aus zwei Blickrichtungen: aus der Sicht der Autoren, die ein Dokument mit Computerunterstützung erstellen und die Dokumentenstruktur manipulieren und aus der Sicht der Lesenden, die ein Dokument lesen und die Struktur des Dokumentes wahrnehmen. Bei der Dokumentenstruktur wird unterschieden zwischen der logischen Struktur und der grafischen Struktur eines Dokumentes. Diese Trennung ermöglicht das Manipulieren und Visualisieren der logischen Struktur. Welche Bedeutung das für die Autoren und für die Benutzenden des Dokumentes hat, soll in dem Beitrag u.a. am Beispiel der Auszeichnungssprache HTML, der Dokumentenbeschreibungssprache des World-Wide Web, erörtert werden
-
Miller, D.R.: XML: Libraries' strategic opportunity (2001)
0.07
0.06689575 = product of:
0.1337915 = sum of:
0.032674633 = weight(_text_:world in 1467) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032674633 = score(doc=1467,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1538826 = queryWeight, product of:
3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.21233483 = fieldWeight in 1467, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1467)
0.043418463 = weight(_text_:wide in 1467) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043418463 = score(doc=1467,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17738682 = queryWeight, product of:
4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.24476713 = fieldWeight in 1467, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1467)
0.05769842 = weight(_text_:web in 1467) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05769842 = score(doc=1467,freq=12.0), product of:
0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.4416067 = fieldWeight in 1467, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1467)
0.5 = coord(3/6)
- Abstract
- XML (eXtensible Markup Language) is fast gaining favor as the universal format for data and document exchange -- in effect becoming the lingua franca of the Information Age. Currently, "library information" is at a particular disadvantage on the rapidly evolving World Wide Web. Why? Despite libraries'explorations of web catalogs, scanning projects, digital data repositories, and creation of web pages galore, there remains a digital divide. The core of libraries' data troves are stored in proprietary formats of integrated library systems (ILS) and in the complex and arcane MARC formats -- both restricted chiefly to the province of technical services and systems librarians. Even they are hard-pressed to extract and integrate this wealth of data with resources from outside this rarefied environment. Segregation of library information underlies many difficulties: producing standard bibliographic citations from MARC data, automatically creating new materials lists (including new web resources) on a particular topic, exchanging data with our vendors, and even migrating from one ILS to another. Why do we continue to hobble our potential by embracing these self-imposed limitations? Most ILSs began in libraries, which soon recognized the pitfalls of do-it-yourself solutions. Thus, we wisely anticipated the necessity for standards. However, with the advent of the web, we soon found "our" collections and a flood of new resources appearing in digital format on opposite sides of the divide. If we do not act quickly to integrate library resources with mainstream web resources, we are in grave danger of becoming marginalized
-
Schwarz, I.; Umstätter, W.: Zum Prinzip der Objektdarstellung in SGML (1998)
0.05
0.049824186 = product of:
0.09964837 = sum of:
0.032674633 = weight(_text_:world in 6617) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032674633 = score(doc=6617,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1538826 = queryWeight, product of:
3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.21233483 = fieldWeight in 6617, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6617)
0.043418463 = weight(_text_:wide in 6617) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043418463 = score(doc=6617,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17738682 = queryWeight, product of:
4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.24476713 = fieldWeight in 6617, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6617)
0.023555283 = weight(_text_:web in 6617) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023555283 = score(doc=6617,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 6617, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6617)
0.5 = coord(3/6)
- Abstract
- Semantische Thesauri sind dazu geeignet, Wissen zu strukturieren. Der vorliegende Beitrag soll unter anderem deutlich machen, daß die SGML (Standard Generalized Markup Language) ein mögliches Instrument zum Aufbau semantischer Thesauri ist. Die SGML ist eine Metasprache, die geeignet ist, Texte in natürlicher Sprache mit Strukturen zu versehen, die das Erkennen des Informationsgehaltes eines Dokuments erleichtern. Zugleich wird damit unter anderem die Voraussetzung dafür geschaffen, Volltextindexierungen in einer Weise vorzunehmen, wie dies bislang nicht möglich war. Die rasant zunehmende Bedeutung der SGML, liegt zweifellos an der bekanntesten Document Type Definition (DTD) im Rahmen der SGML, der Hypertext Markup Language (HTML), wie wir sie im WWW (World Wide Web) des Internet in Anwendung finden. Darüber hinaus erfüllt SGML je nach DTD die Bedingungen, die Objektorientiertheit unserer natürlichen Sprache mit ihren definierbaren Begriffen sinnvoll zu unterstützen und beispielsweise mit Hilfe der objektorientierten Programmiersprache JAVA zu verarbeiten. Besonders hervorzuheben ist die sich damit verändernde Publikationsform bei wissensbasierten Texten, in denen SGML-Dokumente nicht mehr nur für sich zu betrachten sind, wie Zeitschriftenaufsätze oder Bücher, sondern die darüber hinaus in Form von Wissenselementen in einer Daten- und Wissensbank organisiert und recherchiert werden können
-
Helmkamp, K.; Oehlschläger, S.: ¬Die Internationalisierung deutscher Standards : auf dem Weg von MAB2 zu MARC 21. "Access" - der Schlüssel zum Erfolg (2006)
0.03
0.034876935 = product of:
0.06975387 = sum of:
0.022872243 = weight(_text_:world in 4873) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022872243 = score(doc=4873,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1538826 = queryWeight, product of:
3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.14863437 = fieldWeight in 4873, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4873)
0.030392924 = weight(_text_:wide in 4873) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030392924 = score(doc=4873,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17738682 = queryWeight, product of:
4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.171337 = fieldWeight in 4873, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4873)
0.0164887 = weight(_text_:web in 4873) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0164887 = score(doc=4873,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.12619963 = fieldWeight in 4873, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4873)
0.5 = coord(3/6)
- Abstract
- Seit einigen Jahren ist der Begriff "Access" oder "Zugang" in aller Munde. Er bezieht sich auf den Zugang zu Informationsressourcen im World Wide Web und stellt eine zentrale Voraussetzung für den Erfolg oder Misserfolg in der modernen Gesellschaft dar. Viele Lebensbereiche sind auf einen ungehinderten Zugang zu digitalen Ressourcen angewiesen. Für ein Wirtschaftsunternehmen ist es im 21. Jahrhundert nicht mehr nur wichtig, über traditionelle Produktionsfaktoren, wie Maschinen oder Kapital, zu verfügen, von gleicher Bedeutung ist der Zugang auf Informationen, die intern und extern zur Verfügung stehen, und die Grundlage für ein umfassendes Wissensmanagement bilden. Damit kann der Innovationsprozess beschleunigt und das eigene Risiko vermindert werden, beispielsweise wenn bei der Produktentwicklung die Zeit bis zur Markteinführung verringert und damit ein wesentlicher Vorteil gegenüber den Konkurrenten erzielt wird. Auch die Welt der Wissenschaft hat sich in den letzten Jahrzehnten sehr verändert. Das Interesse von Wissenschaftlern ist nicht auf ihre jeweilige eigene nationale und kulturelle Umgebung beschränkt. Sie benötigen Informationen über Dokumente und Daten aus der ganzen Welt. Gleichzeitig wollen sie die eigenen Forschungsergebnisse in der internationalen Forschungsgemeinschaft zur Diskussion stellen. Schließlich ist der Zugang zu digitalen und konventionellen Ressourcen eine Voraussetzung für den Erfolg in dynamischen und global agierenden Gesellschaften und Systemen. Diese sind davon abhängig, dass Wissen ständig neu generiert und organisiert wird, und propagieren das lebenslange Lernen. Das Konzept des lebenslangen Lernens richtet sich an den Einzelnen, der seine Informationskompetenz ständig erweitern soll. Dadurch wird das Bedürfnis nach Bildungsangeboten im weitesten Sinne und folglich nach einem ungehinderten Zugang zu ihnen geweckt. All dies zeigt, dass ein reibungsloser Metadatenaustausch auf der Grundlage von sprachraumübergreifenden Standards eine wichtige Voraussetzung für Erfolge in ganz unterschiedlichen Bereichen ist. Daraus erwachsen wichtige Aufgaben für Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare, die Daten über Dokumente bereitstellen und den Nachweis und Zugang zu ihnen garantieren. Deutschsprachige und ausländische Bibliotheken verwenden derzeit noch unterschiedliche Standards bei der Speicherung und dem Austausch von Katalogdaten. Während in Deutschland und Österreich das Maschinelle Austauschformat für Bibliotheken MAB2 verwendet wird, ist das Format Machine Readable Cataloguing MARC 21 der weltweit am weitesten verbreitete Standard.
-
Kaiser, M.; Lieder, H.J.; Majcen, K.; Vallant, H.: New ways of sharing and using authority information : the LEAF project (2003)
0.03
0.030800914 = product of:
0.06160183 = sum of:
0.016337316 = weight(_text_:world in 1166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016337316 = score(doc=1166,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1538826 = queryWeight, product of:
3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.10616741 = fieldWeight in 1166, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1166)
0.021709232 = weight(_text_:wide in 1166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021709232 = score(doc=1166,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17738682 = queryWeight, product of:
4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.122383565 = fieldWeight in 1166, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1166)
0.023555283 = weight(_text_:web in 1166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023555283 = score(doc=1166,freq=8.0), product of:
0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 1166, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1166)
0.5 = coord(3/6)
- Abstract
- This article presents an overview of the LEAF project (Linking and Exploring Authority Files)1, which has set out to provide a framework for international, collaborative work in the sector of authority data with respect to authority control. Elaborating the virtues of authority control in today's Web environment is an almost futile exercise, since so much has been said and written about it in the last few years.2 The World Wide Web is generally understood to be poorly structured-both with regard to content and to locating required information. Highly structured databases might be viewed as small islands of precision within this chaotic environment. Though the Web in general or any particular structured database would greatly benefit from increased authority control, it should be noted that our following considerations only refer to authority control with regard to databases of "memory institutions" (i.e., libraries, archives, and museums). Moreover, when talking about authority records, we exclusively refer to personal name authority records that describe a specific person. Although different types of authority records could indeed be used in similar ways to the ones presented in this article, discussing those different types is outside the scope of both the LEAF project and this article. Personal name authority records-as are all other "authorities"-are maintained as separate records and linked to various kinds of descriptive records. Name authority records are usually either kept in independent databases or in separate tables in the database containing the descriptive records. This practice points at a crucial benefit: by linking any number of descriptive records to an authorized name record, the records related to this entity are collocated in the database. Variant forms of the authorized name are referenced in the authority records and thus ensure the consistency of the database while enabling search and retrieval operations that produce accurate results. On one hand, authority control may be viewed as a positive prerequisite of a consistent catalogue; on the other, the creation of new authority records is a very time consuming and expensive undertaking. As a consequence, various models of providing access to existing authority records have emerged: the Library of Congress and the French National Library (Bibliothèque nationale de France), for example, make their authority records available to all via a web-based search service.3 In Germany, the Personal Name Authority File (PND, Personennamendatei4) maintained by the German National Library (Die Deutsche Bibliothek, Frankfurt/Main) offers a different approach to shared access: within a closed network, participating institutions have online access to their pooled data. The number of recent projects and initiatives that have addressed the issue of authority control in one way or another is considerable.5 Two important current initiatives should be mentioned here: The Name Authority Cooperative (NACO) and Virtual International Authority File (VIAF).
-
DFG und Mellon-Foundation fördern internationalen Datenaustausch (2006)
0.03
0.025364365 = product of:
0.07609309 = sum of:
0.032674633 = weight(_text_:world in 5070) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032674633 = score(doc=5070,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1538826 = queryWeight, product of:
3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.21233483 = fieldWeight in 5070, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5070)
0.043418463 = weight(_text_:wide in 5070) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043418463 = score(doc=5070,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17738682 = queryWeight, product of:
4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.24476713 = fieldWeight in 5070, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5070)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Content
- "Der aktuelle Speicherort einer Publikation verliert angesichts der steigenden Zahl an digital vorliegenden und über das World Wide Weh verfügbaren Publikationen seine Bedeutung. Entscheidend für die Forschung sind Aufindbarkeit und schnelle Nutzungsmöglichkeit der Informationen. Global zu arbeiten, Daten, Informationen und Texte zu tauschen ist zur täglichen Routine für Wissenschaftler und Bibliothekare geworden. Deutschsprachige und ausländische Bibliotheken verwenden derzeit noch unterschiedliche Standards bei der Speicherung und dem Austausch von Katalogdaten. Die von der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft und der Andrew W. Mellon Foundation geförderten Projekte verfolgen das Ziel, die Daten deutschsprachiger Bibliotheken weltweit sichtbar zu machen. Das Interesse von Wissenschaftlern ist nicht auf ihre jeweilige eigene nationale und kulturelle Umgebung beschränkt. Sie benötigen Informationen über Dokumente und Daten aus der ganzen Welt. Gleichzeitig wollen sie die eigenen Forschungsergebnisse in der internationalen Forschungsgemeinschaft zur Diskussion stellen. Sprachraumübergreifende Standards für Metadaten und deren reibungsloser gegenseitiger Austausch sind Voraussetzung für die wissenschaftliche Kommunikation und für den individuellen Erfolg des einzelnen Forschers. Die Deutsche Bibliothek pflegt seit vielen Jahren Kooperationsbeziehungen auf nationaler und internationaler Ebene. Dazu gehören die Entwicklung und Anwendung von gemeinsamen Regeln und Standards sowie Produktion und Vertrieb von bibliografischen Dienstleistungen und die Pflege kooperativ geführter Datenbanken, insbesondere für Normdaten. Einen weiteren Schwerpunkt bilden Entwicklung und Anwendung moderner Technologien für die Langzeitarchivierung der Bestände im Rahmen internationaler Kooperationen, unabhängig davon, ob die Publikationen auf Papier, Mikrofilm oder digital vorliegen."
-
Helmkamp, K.; Oehlschläger, S.: Standardisierung : Ein Meilenstein auf dem Weg zur Internationalisierung; Im Jahr 2007 erfolgt der Umstieg auf MARC 21 (2006)
0.02
0.024912093 = product of:
0.049824186 = sum of:
0.016337316 = weight(_text_:world in 65) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016337316 = score(doc=65,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1538826 = queryWeight, product of:
3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.10616741 = fieldWeight in 65, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=65)
0.021709232 = weight(_text_:wide in 65) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021709232 = score(doc=65,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17738682 = queryWeight, product of:
4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.122383565 = fieldWeight in 65, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=65)
0.011777641 = weight(_text_:web in 65) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011777641 = score(doc=65,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.09014259 = fieldWeight in 65, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=65)
0.5 = coord(3/6)
- Content
- "Mit der steigenden Zahl von digitalen und digitalisierten Dokumenten, die im World Wide Web zur Verfügung stehen, verliert der aktuelle Speicherort einer Publikation seine Bedeutung. Entscheidend für die Forschung sind vielmehr Auffindbarkeit und schnelle Nutzungsmöglichkeit von Informationen. Global in elektronischen Umgebungen zu arbeiten, Daten, Informationen, Texte zu tauschen und zu mischen, ist zur täglichen Routine für Wissenschaftler und Bibliothekare geworden. Das Interesse von Wissenschaftlern ist nicht auf ihre jeweilige eigene nationale und kulturelle Umgebung beschränkt. Sie benötigen Informationen über Dokumente und Daten aus der ganzen Welt. Gleichzeitig wollen sie die eigenen Forschungsergebnisse in der internationalen Forschungsgemeinschaft zur Diskussion stellen. Sprachraumübergreifende Standards für Metadaten und ein reibungsloser Metadatenaustausch sind Voraussetzung für die wissenschaftliche Kommunikation und für den individuellen Erfolg des einzelnen Forschers. Deutschsprachige und ausländische Bibliotheken verwenden derzeit noch unterschiedliche Standards bei der Speicherung und dem Austausch von Katalogdaten. Während in Deutschland und Österreich das Maschinelle Austauschformat für Bibliotheken MAB2 verwendet wird, ist das Format Machine Readable Cataloguing MARC 21 der weltweit am weitesten verbreitete Standard. Der Standardisierungsausschuss hat in seiner 9. Sitzung am 15. Dezember 2004 wegweisende Beschlüsse zur Internationalisierung der deutschen Standards gefasst.' Diese sehen als ersten Meilenstein die flächendeckende Einführung von MARC 21 als Austauschformat vor. Die Verbundsysteme als größte Datenproduzenten haben sich verpflichtet, MARC 21 einheitlich, das heißt ohne verbundspezifische Besonderheiten, einzuführen und anzuwenden. Gleichzeitig werden die bisher unterschiedlichen Verbundrichtlinien vereinheitlicht. Die Einführung von MARC 21 bildet zusammen mit den Bestrebungen zur Verbesserung der Zusammenarbeit der Verbundsysteme einen entscheidenden Schritt, die Voraussetzungen für Fremddatenübernahme und Datentausch für die deutschen Bibliotheken sowohl auf nationaler als auch auf internationaler Ebene erheblich zu verbessern.
-
Doerr, M.; Gradmann, S.; Hennicke, S.; Isaac, A.; Meghini, C.; Van de Sompel, H.: ¬The Europeana Data Model (EDM) (2010)
0.02
0.022491967 = product of:
0.0674759 = sum of:
0.03920956 = weight(_text_:world in 3967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03920956 = score(doc=3967,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1538826 = queryWeight, product of:
3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.25480178 = fieldWeight in 3967, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3967)
0.028266339 = weight(_text_:web in 3967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028266339 = score(doc=3967,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 3967, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3967)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- The Europeana Data Model (EDM) is a new approach towards structuring and representing data delivered to Europeana by the various contributing cultural heritage institutions. The model aims at greater expressivity and flexibility in comparison to the current Europeana Semantic Elements (ESE), which it is destined to replace. The design principles underlying the EDM are based on the core principles and best practices of the Semantic Web and Linked Data efforts to which Europeana wants to contribute. The model itself builds upon established standards like RDF(S), OAI-ORE, SKOS, and Dublin Core. It acts as a common top-level ontology which retains original data models and information perspectives while at the same time enabling interoperability. The paper elaborates on the aforementioned aspects and the design principles which drove the development of the EDM.
- 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
-
Salgáné, M.M.: Our electronic era and bibliographic informations computer-related bibliographic data formats, metadata formats and BDML (2005)
0.02
0.02046151 = product of:
0.06138453 = sum of:
0.03473477 = weight(_text_:wide in 3005) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03473477 = score(doc=3005,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17738682 = queryWeight, product of:
4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.1958137 = fieldWeight in 3005, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3005)
0.02664976 = weight(_text_:web in 3005) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02664976 = score(doc=3005,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.2039694 = fieldWeight in 3005, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3005)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- Using new communication technologies libraries must face continuously new questions, possibilities and expectations. This study discusses library-related aspects of our electronic era and how computer-related data formats affect bibliographic dataprocessing to give a summary of the most important results. First bibliographic formats for the exchange of bibliographic and related information in the machine-readable form between different types of computer systems were created more than 30 years ago. The evolution of information technologies leads to the improvement of computer systems. In addition to the development of computers and media types Internet has a great influence on data structure as well. Since the introduction of MARC bibliographic format, technology of data exchange between computers and between different computer systems has reached a very sophisticated stage and has contributed to the creation of new standards in this field. Today libraries work with this new infrastructure that induces many challenges. One of the most significant challenges is moving from a relatively homogenous bibliographic environment to a diverse one. Despite these challenges such changes are achievable and necessary to exploit possibilities of new metadata and technologies like the Internet and XML (Extensible Markup Language). XML is an open standard, a universal language for data on the Web. XML is nearly six-years-old standard designed for the description and computer-based management of (semi)-structured data and structured texts. XML gives developers the power to deliver structured data from a wide variety of applications and it is also an ideal format from server-to-server transfer of structured data. XML also isn't limited for Internet use and is an especially valuable tool in the field of library. In fact, XML's main strength - organizing information - makes it perfect for exchanging data between different systems. Tools that work with the XML can be used to process XML records without incurring additional costs associated with one's own software development. In addition, XML is also a suitable format for library web services. The Department of Computer-related Graphic Design and Library and Information Sciences of Debrecen University launched the BDML (Bibliographic Description Markup Language) development project in order to standardize bibliogrphic description with the help of XML.
-
Tennant, R.: ¬A bibliographic metadata infrastructure for the twenty-first century (2004)
0.02
0.019381506 = product of:
0.058144517 = sum of:
0.037688453 = weight(_text_:web in 2845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.037688453 = score(doc=2845,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.2884563 = fieldWeight in 2845, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2845)
0.020456064 = product of:
0.06136819 = sum of:
0.06136819 = weight(_text_:22 in 2845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06136819 = score(doc=2845,freq=4.0), product of:
0.14019686 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = 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)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- The current library bibliographic infrastructure was constructed in the early days of computers - before the Web, XML, and a variety of other technological advances that now offer new opportunities. General requirements of a modern metadata infrastructure for libraries are identified, including such qualities as versatility, extensibility, granularity, and openness. A new kind of metadata infrastructure is then proposed that exhibits at least some of those qualities. Some key challenges that must be overcome to implement a change of this magnitude are identified.
- Date
- 9.12.2005 19:22:38
- Source
- Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.175-181
-
MacCallum, S.H.: Harmonization of USMARC, CANMARC, and UKMARC (2000)
0.02
0.018416433 = product of:
0.055249296 = sum of:
0.046208907 = weight(_text_:world in 185) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.046208907 = score(doc=185,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1538826 = queryWeight, product of:
3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.30028677 = fieldWeight in 185, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=185)
0.009040388 = product of:
0.027121164 = sum of:
0.027121164 = weight(_text_:22 in 185) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027121164 = score(doc=185,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14019686 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 185, 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=185)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
- Footnote
- Beitrag in einem Themenheft "What in the World...Cataloging on an International Scale": papers from the ALCTS preconference, June 26, 1998 "What in the World...Cataloging on an International Scale". ALCTS Preconference, Washington, D.C.
-
IFLA Cataloguing Principles : steps towards an International Cataloguing Code. Report from the 1st Meeting of Experts on an International Cataloguing Code, Frankfurt 2003 (2004)
0.02
0.015777329 = product of:
0.031554658 = sum of:
0.018483564 = weight(_text_:world in 2312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018483564 = score(doc=2312,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1538826 = queryWeight, product of:
3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.120114714 = fieldWeight in 2312, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2312)
0.009422113 = weight(_text_:web in 2312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009422113 = score(doc=2312,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.07211407 = fieldWeight in 2312, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2312)
0.0036489805 = product of:
0.010946942 = sum of:
0.010946942 = weight(_text_:29 in 2312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010946942 = score(doc=2312,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14083174 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.07773064 = fieldWeight in 2312, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2312)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(3/6)
- Date
- 30. 7.2004 14:20:29
- Footnote
- Rez. in: KO 31(2004) no.4, S.255-257: (P. Riva): "Cataloguing standardization at the international level can be viewed as proceeding in a series of milestone conferences. This meeting, the first in a series which will cover different regions of the world, will take its place in that progression. The first IFLA Meeting of Experts an an International Cataloguing Code (IME ICC), held July 28-30, 2003 at Die Deutsche Bibliothek in Frankfurt, gathered representatives of almost all European countries as well as three of the four AACR author countries. As explained in the introduction by Barbara Tillett, chair of the IME ICC planning committee, the plan is for five meetings in total. Subsequent meetings are to take place in Buenos Aires, Argentina (held August 17-18, 2004) for Latin America and the Carribean, to be followed by Alexandria, Egypt (2005) for the Middle East, Seoul, South Korea (2006) for Asia, and Durban, South Africa (2007) for Africa. The impetus for planning these meetings was triggered by the 40th anniversary of the Paris Principles, approved at the International Conference an Cataloguing Principles held in 1961. Many will welcome the timely publication of the reports and papers from this important conference in book form. The original conference website (details given an p. 176) which includes most of the same material, is still extant, but the reports and papers gathered into this volume will be referred to by cataloguing rule makers long after the web as we know it has transformed itself into a new (and quite possibly not backwards compatible) environment.
The next section collects three papers, all presented at the meeting by the people best placed to address the topics authoritatively and comprehensively. The first is by John D. Byrum, of the Library of Congress, and Chair of the ISBD Review Group, who clearly and concisely explains the history and role of the ISBDs in "IFLA's ISBD Programme. Purpose, process, and prospects." The next paper, "Brave new FRBR world" is by Patrick Le Boeuf, of the Bibliothèque nationale de France and Chair of the FRBR Review Group (a French version is available an the website). Drawing from his extensive expertise with FRBR, Le Boeuf explains what FRBR is and equally importantly is not, points to its impact in the present context of Code revision, and discusses insights relevant to the working group topics that can be drawn from FRBR. Closing this section is Barbara Tillett's contribution "A Virtual International Authority File," which signals an important change in thinking about international cooperation for bibliographic control. Earlier efforts focussed an getting agreement about form and structure of headings, this view stresses linking authority files to share the intellectual effort yet present headings to the user in the form that is most appropriate culturally.
-
Lupovici, C.: ¬L'¬information secondaire du document primaire : format MARC ou SGML? (1997)
0.02
0.01524961 = product of:
0.04574883 = sum of:
0.0329774 = weight(_text_:web in 892) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0329774 = score(doc=892,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.25239927 = fieldWeight in 892, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=892)
0.012771431 = product of:
0.038314294 = sum of:
0.038314294 = weight(_text_:29 in 892) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.038314294 = score(doc=892,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14083174 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 892, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=892)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- Secondary information, e.g. MARC based bibliographic records, comprises structured data for identifying, tagging, retrieving and management of primary documents. SGML, the standard format for coding content and structure of primary documents, was introduced in 1986 as a publishing tool but is now being applied to bibliographic records. SGML now comprises standard definitions (DTD) for books, serials, articles and mathematical formulae. A simplified version (HTML) is used for Web pages. Pilot projects to develop SGML as a standard for bibliographic exchange include the Dublin Core, listing 13 descriptive elements for Internet documents; the French GRISELI programme using SGML for exchanging grey literature and US experiments on reformatting USMARC for use with SGML-based records
- Date
- 29. 1.1996 16:50:24
-
Guenther, R.S.: Using the Metadata Object Description Schema (MODS) for resource description : guidelines and applications (2004)
0.02
0.015211314 = product of:
0.045633942 = sum of:
0.0329774 = weight(_text_:web in 2837) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0329774 = score(doc=2837,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.25239927 = fieldWeight in 2837, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2837)
0.012656543 = product of:
0.03796963 = sum of:
0.03796963 = weight(_text_:22 in 2837) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03796963 = score(doc=2837,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14019686 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2837, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2837)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- This paper describes the Metadata Object Description Schema (MODS), its accompanying documentation and some of its applications. It reviews the MODS user guidelines provided by the Library of Congress and how they enable a user of the schema to consistently apply MODS as a metadata scheme. Because the schema itself could not fully document appropriate usage, the guidelines provide element definitions, history, relationships with other elements, usage conventions, and examples. Short descriptions of some MODS applications are given and a more detailed discussion of its use in the Library of Congress's Minerva project for Web archiving is given.
- Source
- Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1, S.89-98
-
Miller, E.; Ogbuji, U.: Linked data design for the visible library (2015)
0.01
0.013071094 = product of:
0.03921328 = sum of:
0.028266339 = weight(_text_:web in 2773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028266339 = score(doc=2773,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 2773, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2773)
0.0109469425 = product of:
0.032840826 = sum of:
0.032840826 = weight(_text_:29 in 2773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032840826 = score(doc=2773,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14083174 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 2773, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2773)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- In response to libraries' frustration over their rich resources being invisible on the web, Zepheira, at the request of the Library of Congress, created BIBFRAME, a bibliographic metadata framework for cataloging. The model replaces MARC records with linked data, promoting resource visibility through a rich network of links. In place of formal taxonomies, a small but extensible vocabulary streamlines metadata efforts. Rather than using a unique bibliographic record to describe one item, BIBFRAME draws on the Dublin Core and the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) to generate formalized descriptions of Work, Instance, Authority and Annotation as well as associations between items. Zepheira trains librarians to transform MARC records to BIBFRAME resources and adapt the vocabulary for specialized needs, while subject matter experts and technical experts manage content, site design and usability. With a different approach toward data modeling and metadata, previously invisible resources gain visibility through linking.
- Source
- Bulletin of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 41(2015) no.4, S.23-29
-
Medeiros, N.: Making room for MARC in a Dublin Core world (1999)
0.01
0.013069853 = product of:
0.07841912 = sum of:
0.07841912 = weight(_text_:world in 350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07841912 = score(doc=350,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1538826 = queryWeight, product of:
3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.50960356 = fieldWeight in 350, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=350)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
-
McCallum, S.H.: Machine Readable Cataloging (MARC): 1975-2007 (2009)
0.01
0.013038268 = product of:
0.039114803 = sum of:
0.028266339 = weight(_text_:web in 3841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028266339 = score(doc=3841,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 3841, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3841)
0.010848465 = product of:
0.032545395 = sum of:
0.032545395 = weight(_text_:22 in 3841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032545395 = score(doc=3841,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14019686 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04003532 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3841, 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=3841)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- This entry describes the development of the MARC Communications format. After a brief overview of the initial 10 years it describes the succeeding phases of development up to the present. This takes the reader through the expansion of the format for all types of bibliographic data and for a multiple character scripts. At the same time a large business community was developing that offered products based on the format to the library community. The introduction of the Internet in the 1990s and the Web technology brought new opportunities and challenges and the format was adapted to this new environment. There has been a great deal of international adoption of the format that has continued into the 2000s. More recently new syntaxes for MARC 21 and models are being explored.
- Date
- 27. 8.2011 14:22:38
