Search (224 results, page 1 of 12)

  • × theme_ss:"Datenformate"
  1. Mönch, C.; Aalberg, T.: Automatic conversion from MARC to FRBR (2003) 0.04 
    0.035868727 = product of:
  0.1673874 = sum of:
    0.0050448296 = weight(_text_:information in 2422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0050448296 = score(doc=2422,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 2422, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2422)
    0.15565105 = weight(_text_:trondheim in 2422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.15565105 = score(doc=2422,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2889541 = queryWeight, product of:
          9.7509775 = idf(docFreq=6, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.5386705 = fieldWeight in 2422, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          9.7509775 = idf(docFreq=6, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2422)
    0.0066915164 = product of:
      0.020074548 = sum of:
        0.020074548 = weight(_text_:22 in 2422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020074548 = score(doc=2422,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.103770934 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2422, 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=2422)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    Catalogs have for centuries been the main tool that enabled users to search for items in a library by author, title, or subject. A catalog can be interpreted as a set of bibliographic records, where each record acts as a surrogate for a publication. Every record describes a specific publication and contains the data that is used to create the indexes of search systems and the information that is presented to the user. Bibliographic records are often captured and exchanged by the use of the MARC format. Although there are numerous rdquodialectsrdquo of the MARC format in use, they are usually crafted on the same basis and are interoperable with each other -to a certain extent. The data model of a MARC-based catalog, however, is rdquo[...] extremely non-normalized with excessive replication of datardquo [1]. For instance, a literary work that exists in numerous editions and translations is likely to yield a large result set because each edition or translation is represented by an individual record, that is unrelated to other records that describe the same work.
    Source
    Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 7th European Conference, proceedings / ECDL 2003, Trondheim, Norway, August 17-22, 2003
  2. Johnson, B.C.: XML and MARC : which is "right"? (2001) 0.03 
    0.032204557 = product of:
  0.112715945 = sum of:
    0.044992477 = weight(_text_:wide in 5423) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044992477 = score(doc=5423,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1312982 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = 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)
    0.034519844 = weight(_text_:web in 5423) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034519844 = score(doc=5423,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = 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)
    0.012233062 = weight(_text_:information in 5423) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012233062 = score(doc=5423,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.23515764 = fieldWeight in 5423, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5423)
    0.020970564 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5423) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020970564 = score(doc=5423,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 5423, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5423)
  0.2857143 = coord(4/14)
    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.
  3. Oehlschläger, S.: Treffpunkt Standardisierung : Eine Veranstaltung des Standardisierungsausschusses beim 2. Leipziger Kongress für Information und Bibliothek (2004) 0.03 
    0.028042916 = product of:
  0.13086694 = sum of:
    0.044148326 = weight(_text_:bibliothek in 2790) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044148326 = score(doc=2790,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.121660605 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.1055303 = idf(docFreq=1980, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.36288103 = fieldWeight in 2790, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          4.1055303 = idf(docFreq=1980, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2790)
    0.0069903214 = weight(_text_:information in 2790) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0069903214 = score(doc=2790,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.1343758 = fieldWeight in 2790, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2790)
    0.079728305 = weight(_text_:kongress in 2790) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.079728305 = score(doc=2790,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19442701 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.41006804 = fieldWeight in 2790, 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=2790)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    Treffpunkt Standardisierung - Projekte, Konzepte und Kooperationen - lautete der Titel der Veranstaltung des Standardisierungsausschusses beim 2. Leipziger Kongress für Information und Bibliothek »Information Macht Bildung«, die vom Vorsitzenden Berndt Dugall moderiert wurde. Den größten Raum innerhalb der Veranstaltung nahm der Themenkomplex »Umstieg auf internationale Formate und Regelwerke (MARC21, AACR2)« ein. Zunächst stellte die Projektbearbeiterin Luise Hoffmann die Ausgangslage des Projektes sowie bisher vorliegende Ergebnisse aus dem von der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) geförderten Projekt vor und ging dabei auf einige Projektschwerpunkte ein: Luise Hoffmann stellte einige Punkte aus dem Regelwerks- und Formatabgleich sowie der Untersuchung über die Konsequenzen eines Umstiegs auf die laufende Katalogisierung vor und ging dann ausführlicher auf mögliche Auswirkungen eines Umstiegs auf die Informationsversorgung des Benutzers ein, einen Aspekt, dem im DFG-Antrag eine besondere, hervorgehobene Bedeutung beigemessen wird. In erster Linie wurden die Strategien der Benutzer zur Literatursuche untersucht. Ziel war es, herauszufinden, ob und welche Auswirkungen ein Umstieg auf die Benutzung des örtlichen Bibliothekskatalogs haben würde. Hierzu wurde zunächst die Suchstrategie von Benutzern ermittelt, um anschließend analysieren zu können, ob diese Strategie in einem AACR-MARC-basierten Katalog erfolgreicher oder weniger erfolgreich gewesen wäre. Da die zunehmende Literaturrecherche im Internet möglicherweise das Suchverhalten in einem OPAC beeinflusst, wurde zusätzlich die Suchstrategie im Internet erfragt. Zur Ermittlung der Suchstrategie wurde ein Fragebogen entworfen und in Der Deutschen Bibliothek getestet. Anhand der Deutschen Bibliotheksstatistik wurden Bibliotheken unter den Gesichtspunkten der Nutzerfrequenz und der Bestandsgröße ausgewählt und angefragt, ob sie bereit wären, den Fragebogen in ihrer Bibliothek auszulegen. Nachdem sich zehn Bibliotheken bereit erklärt hatten, wurden für die endgültige Befragung einige spezielle Fragen zu Suchbegriffen an die jeweiligen Bibliotheks-OPACs angepasst, da Formulierungen und Bezeichnungen wie Person, Autor, Verfasser u. dgl. in den Bibliothekskatalogen voneinander abweichen können. Als erstes Ergebnis nach Auswertung der Fragebögen aus drei Universitätsbibliotheken konnte festgestellt werden, dass Benutzer überwiegend unter Titelstichwörtern und Personen suchen und dabei Namensformen verwenden, die ihnen geläufig sind. Ein großer Teil der Benutzer weiß der Umfrage zufolge nicht, wie man den Band eines mehrbändigen Werkes sucht, und fast die Hälfte aller Befragten sucht nach Aufsätzen von Sammelwerken. Benutzer unterscheiden überwiegend bei ihrer Suche nicht, ob sie in einem deutschen oder einem ausländischen Katalog recherchieren. Um zu einheitlichen Suchergebnissen bei der Suche in deutschen und ausländischen Katalogen zu gelangen, sollte eine Annäherung der Standards angestrebt werden.
  4. Oehlschläger, S.: Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme : Aus der 46. Sitzung am 21. und 22. April 2004 im Bibliotheksservice-Zentrum Baden-Württemberg in Konstanz (2004) 0.03 
    0.025999768 = product of:
  0.090999186 = sum of:
    0.033454377 = weight(_text_:bibliothek in 2434) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033454377 = score(doc=2434,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.121660605 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.1055303 = idf(docFreq=1980, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.27498117 = fieldWeight in 2434, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.1055303 = idf(docFreq=1980, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2434)
    0.0035313808 = weight(_text_:information in 2434) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0035313808 = score(doc=2434,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.06788416 = fieldWeight in 2434, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2434)
    0.04932937 = weight(_text_:kongress in 2434) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04932937 = score(doc=2434,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19442701 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.25371665 = fieldWeight in 2434, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2434)
    0.0046840613 = product of:
      0.014052183 = sum of:
        0.014052183 = weight(_text_:22 in 2434) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014052183 = score(doc=2434,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.103770934 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 2434, 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=2434)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.2857143 = coord(4/14)
    Content
    - Projekt Umstieg auf internationale Formate und Regelwerke (MARC21, AACR2) Das Projekt Umstieg auf internationale Formate und Regelwerke (MARC21, AACR2) stand zum Zeitpunkt der Sitzung der Arbeitsgemeinschaft kurz vor seinem Abschluss. Im Rahmen der Veranstaltung des Standardisierungsausschusses beim 2. Leipziger Kongress für Information und Bibliothek wurden die wesentlichen Projektergebnisse vorgestellt. Aufgrund der vorliegenden Informationen gehen die Mitglieder der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme davon aus, dass das finanzielle Argument bei der anstehenden Entscheidung nicht mehr im Vordergrund stehen kann. Auch wenn davon ausgegangen wird, dass eine klare Umstiegsentscheidung durch den Standardisierungsausschuss derzeit politisch nicht durchsetzbar sei, sehen die Mitglieder der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme die Entwicklung durch die Projektergebnisse positiv. Durch die Diskussion wurden Defizite des deutschen Regelwerks und der Verbundpraxis offen gelegt und verschiedene Neuerungen angestoßen. Zur Verbesserung des Datentausches untereinander sehen die Verbundzentralen unabhängig von einer Entscheidung des Standardisierungsausschusses die Notwendigkeit, ihre Datenbestände zu homogenisieren und Hierarchien abzubauen bzw. die Verknüpfungsstrukturen zu vereinfachen. Auch die Entwicklung der Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) muss in diese Überlegungen einbezogen werden. Die Formate müssen dahingehend entwickelt werden, dass alle relevanten Informationen im Titelsatz transportiert werden können. Es wird eine Konvergenz von Regelwerk und Format angestrebt.
    - Elektronischer DDC-Dienst Im Fall der deutschen Übersetzung der Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) wurde die Idee einer Normdatei DDC-Deutsch zugunsten eines zentralen elektronischen DDC-Dienstes bei Der Deutschen Bibliothek aufgegeben. Dieser Dienst hält die übersetzten Daten bereit und stellt sie in drei verschiedenen Ausprägungen zur Verfügung: 1. Zentrales Such- und Browsingtool für Benutzer 2. Klassifikationswerkzeug für Sacherschließer 3. SOAP-Schnittstelle für den elektronischen Datenaustausch. Um die DDC künftig gewinnbringend in der Benutzung einsetzen zu können, werden Konkordanzen zu anderen Klassifikationen, insbesondere aber zur weit verbreiteten Regensburger Verbundklassifikation (RVK) benötigt. Mithilfe dieser Konkordanzen können Benutzer im OPAL Der Deutschen Bibliothek nach DDC-Notationen suchen und würden zusätzlich Ergebnisse aus den Verbünden angezeigt bekommen, die bislang nicht mit der DDC erschlossen sind. Der GBV plant eine Grunderschließung seiner Verbunddatenbank mit der DDC in 5 Ebenen. Ziel ist es, bis Ende 2005 alle Verbunddaten mit der DDC zu verbinden und damit ein bedeutendes Recherchetool zu erhalten.
  5. Kaiser, M.; Lieder, H.J.; Majcen, K.; Vallant, H.: New ways of sharing and using authority information : the LEAF project (2003) 0.02 
    0.021128101 = product of:
  0.059158683 = sum of:
    0.016068742 = weight(_text_:wide in 1166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016068742 = score(doc=1166,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1312982 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = 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)
    0.017435152 = weight(_text_:web in 1166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017435152 = score(doc=1166,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = 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)
    0.013796352 = weight(_text_:bibliothek in 1166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013796352 = score(doc=1166,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.121660605 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.1055303 = idf(docFreq=1980, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.113400325 = fieldWeight in 1166, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.1055303 = idf(docFreq=1980, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1166)
    0.004368951 = weight(_text_:information in 1166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004368951 = score(doc=1166,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.083984874 = fieldWeight in 1166, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1166)
    0.007489487 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007489487 = score(doc=1166,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.08355226 = fieldWeight in 1166, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1166)
  0.35714287 = coord(5/14)
    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).
    NACO was established in 1976 and is hosted by the Library of Congress. At the beginning of 2003, nearly 400 institutions were involved in this undertaking, including 43 institutions from outside the United States.6 Despite the enormous success of NACO and the impressive annual growth of the initiative, there are requirements for participation that form an obstacle for many institutions: they have to follow the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (AACR2) and employ the MARC217 data format. Participating institutions also have to belong to either OCLC (Online Computer Library Center) or RLG (Research Libraries Group) in order to be able to contribute records, and they have to provide a specified minimum number of authority records per year. A recent proof of concept project of the Library of Congress, OCLC and the German National Library-Virtual International Authority File (VIAF)8-will, in its first phase, test automatic linking of the records of the Library of Congress Name Authority File (LCNAF) and the German Personal Name Authority File by using matching algorithms and software developed by OCLC. The results are expected to form the basis of a "Virtual International Authority File". The project will then test the maintenance of the virtual authority file by employing the Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting (OAI-PMH)9 to harvest the metadata for new, updated, and deleted records. When using the "Virtual International Authority File" a cataloguer will be able to check the system to see whether the authority record he wants to establish already exists. The final phase of the project will test possibilities for displaying records in the preferred language and script of the end user. Currently, there are still some clear limitations associated with the ways in which authority records are used by memory institutions. One of the main problems has to do with limited access: generally only large institutions or those that are part of a library network have unlimited online access to permanently updated authority records. Smaller institutions outside these networks usually have to fall back on less efficient ways of obtaining authority data, or have no access at all. Cross-domain sharing of authority data between libraries, archives, museums and other memory institutions simply does not happen at present. Public users are, by and large, not even aware that such things as name authority records exist and are excluded from access to these information resources.
  6. Henze, V.: ¬Die Deutsche Bibliothek : 1. Ergänzungslieferung zur MAB2-Dokumentation (1996) 0.02 
    0.018343404 = product of:
  0.12840383 = sum of:
    0.07321842 = weight(_text_:elektronische in 5976) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07321842 = score(doc=5976,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14013545 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.728978 = idf(docFreq=1061, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.5224832 = fieldWeight in 5976, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.728978 = idf(docFreq=1061, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5976)
    0.055185407 = weight(_text_:bibliothek in 5976) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.055185407 = score(doc=5976,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.121660605 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.1055303 = idf(docFreq=1980, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.4536013 = fieldWeight in 5976, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.1055303 = idf(docFreq=1980, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5976)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Form
    Elektronische Dokumente
  7. Miller, D.R.: XML: Libraries' strategic opportunity (2001) 0.02 
    0.017910559 = product of:
  0.08358261 = sum of:
    0.032137483 = weight(_text_:wide in 1467) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032137483 = score(doc=1467,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1312982 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = 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)
    0.042707227 = weight(_text_:web in 1467) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042707227 = score(doc=1467,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = 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)
    0.008737902 = weight(_text_:information in 1467) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008737902 = score(doc=1467,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 1467, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1467)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    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
  8. 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 
    0.017534416 = product of:
  0.061370455 = sum of:
    0.006974061 = weight(_text_:web in 2312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006974061 = score(doc=2312,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = 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)
    0.0110370815 = weight(_text_:bibliothek in 2312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0110370815 = score(doc=2312,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.121660605 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.1055303 = idf(docFreq=1980, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.09072026 = fieldWeight in 2312, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.1055303 = idf(docFreq=1980, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2312)
    0.0034951607 = weight(_text_:information in 2312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0034951607 = score(doc=2312,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.0671879 = fieldWeight in 2312, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2312)
    0.039864153 = weight(_text_:kongress in 2312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.039864153 = score(doc=2312,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19442701 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.20503402 = fieldWeight in 2312, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2312)
  0.2857143 = coord(4/14)
    BK
    06.04 / Ausbildung, Beruf, Organisationen <Information und Dokumentation>
    Classification
    06.04 / Ausbildung, Beruf, Organisationen <Information und Dokumentation>
    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 book is organized into four sections: introduction and results; presentation papers; background papers; and an appendix. The introduction by Barbara Tillett serves as a summary and report of the IME ICC meeting itself. The statement of the purpose of the meeting bears reporting in full (p. 6): "The goal for this meeting was to increase the ability to share cataloguing information worldwide by promoting standards for the content of bibliographic records and authority records used in library catalogues." The next item is a report summarizing the cataloguing Code comparisons prepared prior to the conference. As a mechanism for discussion, 18 codes were compared with the Paris Principles, the extent of compliance or divergence noted and discussed by representatives from the respective rule-making bodies. During the meeting the presentation of the comparisons took up half of the first day, but for the detailed responses one must return to the IME ICC website. The published summary is very dense, and difficult to follow if one is not very familiar with the Paris Principles or the codes being compared. The main outcome of the meeting follows, this is the Statement of International Cataloguing Principles (draft, as approved Dec. 19, 2003 by IME ICC participants), accompanied by a useful Glossary. The most important eontribution of this volume is to serve as the permanent and official record of the Statement as it stands after the first IME ICC meeting. Subsequent meetings will surely suggest modifications and enhancements, but this version of the Statement needs to be widely read and commented on. To this end the website also makes available translations of the Statement into 15 European languages, and the glossary into four languages. Compared to the Paris Principles, this statement covers some familiar ground in the choice of access points and forms of names, but its overall scope is broader, explicitly referring to the role of authority records, entities in bibliographic records and relationships. It concludes with an appendix of "Objectives for the construction of cataloguing codes."
    RSWK
    Alphabetische Katalogisierung / Standardisierung / Internationale Kooperation / Kongress / Frankfurt <Main, 2003>
    Subject
    Alphabetische Katalogisierung / Standardisierung / Internationale Kooperation / Kongress / Frankfurt <Main, 2003>
  9. Cantrall, D.: From MARC to Mosaic : progressing toward data interchangeability at the Oregon State Archives (1994) 0.02 
    0.017493162 = product of:
  0.08163475 = sum of:
    0.044992477 = weight(_text_:wide in 8470) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044992477 = score(doc=8470,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1312982 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = 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)
    0.024409214 = weight(_text_:web in 8470) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024409214 = score(doc=8470,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = 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)
    0.012233062 = weight(_text_:information in 8470) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012233062 = score(doc=8470,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.23515764 = fieldWeight in 8470, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8470)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    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
  10. Nix, M.: ¬Die praktische Einsetzbarkeit des CIDOC CRM in Informationssystemen im Bereich des Kulturerbes (2004) 0.02 
    0.017291287 = product of:
  0.08069267 = sum of:
    0.045449268 = weight(_text_:wide in 3742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045449268 = score(doc=3742,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1312982 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = 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)
    0.03019857 = weight(_text_:web in 3742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03019857 = score(doc=3742,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = 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)
    0.0050448296 = weight(_text_:information in 3742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0050448296 = score(doc=3742,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 3742, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3742)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    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.
  11. Oehlschläger, S.: Aus der 48. Sitzung der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme am 12. und 13. November 2004 in Göttingen (2005) 0.01 
    0.013273334 = product of:
  0.061942223 = sum of:
    0.012328515 = weight(_text_:web in 3556) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012328515 = score(doc=3556,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.12748088 = fieldWeight in 3556, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3556)
    0.039021976 = weight(_text_:bibliothek in 3556) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.039021976 = score(doc=3556,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.121660605 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.1055303 = idf(docFreq=1980, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.32074454 = fieldWeight in 3556, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          4.1055303 = idf(docFreq=1980, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3556)
    0.010591734 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3556) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010591734 = score(doc=3556,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.11816074 = fieldWeight in 3556, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3556)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Content
    Enthält u.a. folgende Aussagen aus einzelnen Bibliotheken oder Verbünden: MARC21 als Austauschformat Die Expertengruppe Datenformate des Standardisierungsausschusses hat am 11. April 2005 getagt, dabei wurden die Arbeitspakete aus einem von der Arbeitsstelle für Standardisierung Der Deutschen Bibliothek vorgelegten Projektund Zeitplan in überschaubare Einheiten aufgegliedert. Ziel ist es, das bestehende MARC21 weitgehend zu übernehmen. Sollten nationale Abweichungen von MARC21 dennoch notwendig sein, so müssen diese einheitlich für alle Verbünde gelten. Bibliotheksservicezentrum Baden-Württemberg (BSZ) SWBPIus "Catalogue enrichment", die Anreicherung von Katalogdaten durch ergänzende Materialien, wie z. B. Rezensionen und Inhaltsverzeichnisse, wird als eine der wichtigsten Möglichkeiten diskutiert, die Nutzung von OPACs zu erleichtern und zu verbessern. Ganz im Trend liegt daher die Anwendung SWBplus, in der das BSZ weiterführende Texte zu Titeln in Verbund- und lokalen OPACs auflegt. Nach ca. 2.500 Dokumenten im Jahr 2003 ist der Bestand mittlerweile bei 12.300 angelangt. Mit 6.900 haben dabei die Inhaltsverzeichnisse die Rezensionen anteilsmäßig überholt. Erreicht wurde dies durch die Mitarbeit der Universitätsbibliotheken Konstanz und Heidelberg, die Inhaltsverzeichnisse scannen und an das BSZ liefern. In diese Kooperation werden nun auch die Universitätsbibliothek Mannheim, die Bibliotheken der PH Ludwigsburg und PH Freiburg sowie die Bibliothek des Bundesgerichtshofs in Karlsruhe eintreten. Vorbereitet wird zudem die Zusammenarbeit mit dem Bibliotheksverbund Bayern, so dass Inhaltsverzeichnisse auch aus Bayern in die Datenbank eingebracht und gemeinsam genutzt werden können. Fehlertolerante Suche in OPACs Gemeinsam mit der Bibliothek der Fachhochschule Konstanz und der Firma exorbyte führt das BSZ derzeit einen Test durch, in dem OPAC-Nutzer bei Unsicherheiten hinsichtlich der Schreibweise von Suchbegriffen unterstützt werden. Dazu wurde dem Horizon-WebPac der FH Konstanz die RechercheSoftware Matchmaker vorgeschaltet, die dem Nutzer neben exakten auch näherungsweise Treffer sowie Alternativen zu den Suchbegriffen anbietet. Sucht man dort nun z. B. nach "Pronnstein", so findet man dennoch unter den ersten Treffern die bekannte mathematische Formelsammlung von Ilja Bronstejn. In einer Befragung, die den Test begleitet, fanden ca. 70% der Nutzer den Einsatz dieser Technologie hilfreich und gaben an, auch die Alternativvorschläge zu nutzen. Weitere Informationen stehen unter der Adresse http://cms.bsz-bw.de/cms/entwicki/ftolsuche/ zur Verfügung. Interessenten an einem Einsatz der Software melden sich bitte beim BSZ, das die Einführung koordiniert.
    Die Deutsche Bibliothek Retrieval von Content In dem Projekt wird angestrebt, Verfahren zu entwickeln und einzuführen, die automatisch und ohne intellektuelle Bearbeitung für das Content-Retrieval ausreichend Sucheinstiege bieten. Dabei kann es sich um die Suche nach Inhalten von Volltexten, digitalen Abbildern, Audiofiles, Videofiles etc. von in Der Deutschen Bibliothek archivierten digitalen Ressourcen oder digitalen Surrogaten archivierter analoger Ressourcen (z. B. OCR-Ergebnisse) handeln. Inhalte, die in elektronischer Form vorhanden sind, aber dem InternetBenutzer Der Deutschen Bibliothek bisher nicht oder nur eingeschränkt zur Verfügung stehen, sollen in möglichst großem Umfang und mit möglichst großem Komfort nutzbar gemacht werden. Darüber hinaus sollen Inhalte benutzt werden, die für ein in ILTIS katalogisiertes Objekt beschreibenden Charakter haben, um auf das beschriebene Objekt zu verweisen. Die höchste Priorität liegt dabei auf der Erschließung von Inhalten in Textformaten. In einem ersten Schritt wurde der Volltext aller Zeitschriften, die im Projekt "Exilpresse digital" digitalisiert wurden, für eine erweiterte Suche genutzt. In einem nächsten Schritt soll die PSI-Software für die Volltextindexierung von Abstracts evaluiert werden. MILOS Mit dem Einsatz von MILOS eröffnet sich die Möglichkeit, nicht oder wenig sachlich erschlossene Bestände automatisch mit ergänzenden Inhaltserschließungsinformationen zu versehen, der Schwerpunkt liegt dabei auf der Freitext-Indexierung. Das bereits in einigen Bibliotheken eingesetzte System, das inzwischen von Der Deutschen Bibliothek für Deutschland lizenziert wurde, wurde in eine UNIX-Version überführt und angepasst. Inzwischen wurde nahezu der gesamte Bestand rückwirkend behandelt, die Daten werden im Gesamt-OPAC für die Recherche zur Verfügung stehen. Die in einer XMLStruktur abgelegten Indexeinträge werden dabei vollständig indexiert und zugänglich gemacht. Ein weiterer Entwicklungsschritt wird in dem Einsatz von MILOS im Online-Verfahren liegen.
    Hessisches BibliotheksinformationsSystem (HEBIS) Personennamendatei (PND) Vor dem Hintergrund der Harmonisierungsbestrebungen bei den Normdateien hat der HeBIS-Verbundrat nach erneuter Diskussion mehrheitlich entschieden, künftig neben SWD und GKD auch die PND als in HeBIS integrierte Normdatei obligatorisch zu nutzen. Im Zuge der wachsenden Vernetzung der regionalen Verbundsysteme kommt der Homogenität der Datensätze eine zunehmend wichtigere Bedeutung zu. Konkret wird dies speziell für HeBIS mit dem Produktionsbeginn des HeBIS-Portals und der integrierten verbundübergreifenden Fernleihe. Nur wenn die Verfasserrecherche in den einzelnen Verbunddatenbanken auf weitgehend einheitliche Datensätze einschließlich Verweisungsformen trifft, kann der Benutzer gute Trefferergebnisse erwarten und damit seine Chancen erhöhen, die gewünschte Literatur über Fernleihe bestellen zu können. Das Gesamtkonzept ist ausgelegt auf eine pragmatische und aufwandsreduzierte Vorgehensweise. Mit der Umsetzung wurde begonnen. Hochschulbibliothekszentrum des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen (HBZ) FAST-Suchmaschine Das HBZ hat die Suchmaschinentechnologie des norwegischen Herstellers FAST lizenziert. Ziel ist es, die Produkte des HBZ mit Hilfe innovativer Suchmaschinentechnologien in einer neuen Ausrichtung zu präsentieren. Die Präsentation soll einen schnellen Recherche-Zugang zu den NRWVerbunddaten mittels FAST-Suchmaschinentechnologie mit folgenden Eigenschaften beinhalten: - Eine Web-Oberfläche, um für Laien eine schnelle Literatursuche anbieten zu können. - Eine Web-Oberfläche, um für Expertinnen und Experten eine schnelle Literatur-Suche anbieten zu können. - Präsentation von Zusatzfunktionen, die in gängigen Bibliothekskatalogen so nicht vorhanden sind. - Schaffung einer Zugriffsmöglichkeit für den KVK auf die Verbunddaten mit sehr kurzen Antwortzeiten Digitale Bibliothek Die Mehrzahl der Bibliotheken ist inzwischen auf Release 5 umgezogen. Einige befinden sich noch im Bearbeitungsstatus. Von den letzten drei Bibliotheken liegen inzwischen die Umzugsanträge vor. Durch die Umstrukturierung der RLB Koblenz zum LBZ Rheinland-Pfalz werden die Einzelsichten der RLB Koblenz, PLB Speyer und der Bipontina in Zweibrücken mit den Büchereistellen Koblenz und Neustadt zu einer Sicht verschmolzen.
  12. Salgáné, M.M.: Our electronic era and bibliographic informations computer-related bibliographic data formats, metadata formats and BDML (2005) 0.01 
    0.011670016 = product of:
  0.05446007 = sum of:
    0.025709987 = weight(_text_:wide in 3005) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025709987 = score(doc=3005,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1312982 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = 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)
    0.019725623 = weight(_text_:web in 3005) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019725623 = score(doc=3005,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = 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)
    0.009024465 = weight(_text_:information in 3005) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009024465 = score(doc=3005,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.1734784 = fieldWeight in 3005, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3005)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    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.
    Source
    Librarianship in the information age: Proceedings of the 13th BOBCATSSS Symposium, 31 January - 2 February 2005 in Budapest, Hungary. Eds.: Marte Langeland u.a
  13. IFLA Cataloguing Principles : steps towards an International Cataloguing Code, 2. Report from the 2nd IFLA Meeting of Experts on an International Cataloguing Code : Buenos Aires, Argentina, 2004 (2005) 0.01 
    0.011389758 = product of:
  0.15945661 = sum of:
    0.15945661 = weight(_text_:kongress in 3865) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.15945661 = score(doc=3865,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19442701 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.8201361 = fieldWeight in 3865, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3865)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    RSWK
    Alphabetische Katalogisierung / Standardisierung / Internationale Kooperation / Kongress / Buenos Aires <2004>
    Subject
    Alphabetische Katalogisierung / Standardisierung / Internationale Kooperation / Kongress / Buenos Aires <2004>
  14. IFLA Cataloguing Principles : steps towards an International Cataloguing Code, 5. Report from the 5th IFLA Meeting of Experts on an International Cataloguing Code : Pretoria, South Africa, 2007 = Rapport de la 5ème Réunion d'Experts de l'IFLA sur un Code International de Catalogage (2008) 0.01 
    0.011389758 = product of:
  0.15945661 = sum of:
    0.15945661 = weight(_text_:kongress in 2311) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.15945661 = score(doc=2311,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19442701 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.8201361 = fieldWeight in 2311, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2311)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    RSWK
    Alphabetische Katalogisierung / Standardisierung / Internationale Kooperation / Kongress / Pretoria <2007>
    Subject
    Alphabetische Katalogisierung / Standardisierung / Internationale Kooperation / Kongress / Pretoria <2007>
  15. IFLA Cataloguing Principles : steps towards an International Cataloguing Code, 3. Report from the 3rd IFLA Meeting of Experts on an International Cataloguing Code : Cairo, Egypt, 2005 (2006) 0.01 
    0.011389758 = product of:
  0.15945661 = sum of:
    0.15945661 = weight(_text_:kongress in 2313) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.15945661 = score(doc=2313,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19442701 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.8201361 = fieldWeight in 2313, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2313)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    RSWK
    Alphabetische Katalogisierung / Standardisierung / Internationale Kooperation / Kongress / Kairo <2005>
    Subject
    Alphabetische Katalogisierung / Standardisierung / Internationale Kooperation / Kongress / Kairo <2005>
  16. IFLA Cataloguing Principles : steps towards an International Cataloguing Code, 4. Report from the 4th IFLA Meeting of Experts on an International Cataloguing Code : Seoul, Korea, 2006 (2007) 0.01 
    0.011389758 = product of:
  0.15945661 = sum of:
    0.15945661 = weight(_text_:kongress in 2314) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.15945661 = score(doc=2314,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19442701 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.8201361 = fieldWeight in 2314, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2314)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    RSWK
    Alphabetische Katalogisierung / Standardisierung / Internationale Kooperation / Kongress / Seoul <2006>
    Subject
    Alphabetische Katalogisierung / Standardisierung / Internationale Kooperation / Kongress / Seoul <2006>
  17. Henze, V.: MAB2-Zeichenvorrat und -codes : Erweiterungen von MAB2 für Elektronische Publikationen (1996) 0.01 
    0.010354649 = product of:
  0.14496508 = sum of:
    0.14496508 = weight(_text_:elektronische in 4276) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14496508 = score(doc=4276,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14013545 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.728978 = idf(docFreq=1061, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        1.034464 = fieldWeight in 4276, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.728978 = idf(docFreq=1061, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4276)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    Form
    Elektronische Datenträger
  18. Oeltjen, W.: Dokumentenstrukturen manipulieren und visualisieren : über das Arbeiten mit der logischen Struktur (1998) 0.01 
    0.009914528 = product of:
  0.06940169 = sum of:
    0.044992477 = weight(_text_:wide in 6616) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044992477 = score(doc=6616,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1312982 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = 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)
    0.024409214 = weight(_text_:web in 6616) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024409214 = score(doc=6616,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = 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)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    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
  19. Giordano, R.: ¬The documentation of electronic texts : using Text Encoding Initiative headers: an introduction (1994) 0.01 
    0.009907316 = product of:
  0.06935121 = sum of:
    0.043931052 = weight(_text_:elektronische in 866) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.043931052 = score(doc=866,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14013545 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.728978 = idf(docFreq=1061, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.3134899 = fieldWeight in 866, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.728978 = idf(docFreq=1061, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=866)
    0.025420163 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 866) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025420163 = score(doc=866,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.2835858 = fieldWeight in 866, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=866)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    Presents a general introduction to the form and functions of the Text Encoding Initiative (TEI) headers and explains their relationship to the MARC record. The TEI header's main strength is that it documents electronic texts in a standard exchange format that should be understandable to both librarian cataloguers and text encoders outside of librarianship. TEI gives encoders the ability to document the the electronic text itself, its source, its encoding principles, and revisions, as well as non bibliographic characteristics of the text that can support both scholarly analysis and retrieval. Its bibliographic descriptions can be loaded into standard remote bibliographic databases, which should make electronic texts as easy to find for researchers as texts in other media. Presents a brief overview of the TEI header, the file description and ways in which the TEI headers have counterparts in MARC, the Encoding Description, the Profile Description, the Revision Description, the size and complexity of the TEI header, and the use of the TEI header to support document retrieval and analysis, with notes on some of the prospects and problems
    Form
    Elektronische Dokumente
  20. MAB2 : Maschinelles Austauschformat für Bibliotheken (1995) 0.01 
    0.008919309 = product of:
  0.12487032 = sum of:
    0.12487032 = weight(_text_:bibliothek in 4298) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12487032 = score(doc=4298,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.121660605 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.1055303 = idf(docFreq=1980, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        1.0263826 = fieldWeight in 4298, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.1055303 = idf(docFreq=1980, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4298)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    Editor
    ¬Die Deutsche Bibliothek
    Imprint
    Leipzig : Die Deutsche Bibliothek

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 139
  • d 70
  • f 8
  • pl 1
  • sp 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 175
  • m 23
  • s 14
  • el 12
  • l 4
  • n 4
  • x 3
  • b 2
  • ? 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications