Search (60 results, page 1 of 3)

  • × type_ss:"n"
  1. Z39.58-1992: Common command language for online interactive information retrieval (1992) 0.02
    0.016126212 = product of:
      0.08600646 = sum of:
        0.022595147 = product of:
          0.045190293 = sum of:
            0.045190293 = weight(_text_:online in 4801) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.045190293 = score(doc=4801,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.09529729 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.031400457 = queryNorm
                0.47420335 = fieldWeight in 4801, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4801)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.018517928 = weight(_text_:information in 4801) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018517928 = score(doc=4801,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.055122808 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.3359395 = fieldWeight in 4801, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4801)
        0.044893384 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4801) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.044893384 = score(doc=4801,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.09498371 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.47264296 = fieldWeight in 4801, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4801)
      0.1875 = coord(3/16)
    
    Abstract
    Useful to system designers that want to specify a uniform command terminology, Z39.58-1992 describes nineteen non-proprietary command terms for use in online information retrieval systems. Defines the vocabulary, syntax, and operational meaning of the commands
    Editor
    National Information Standards Organization
  2. OWL Web Ontology Language Guide (2004) 0.02
    0.01587254 = product of:
      0.08465355 = sum of:
        0.03405392 = weight(_text_:wide in 4687) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03405392 = score(doc=4687,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13912784 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.24476713 = fieldWeight in 4687, 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=4687)
        0.045253962 = weight(_text_:web in 4687) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045253962 = score(doc=4687,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.10247572 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.4416067 = fieldWeight in 4687, 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=4687)
        0.005345665 = weight(_text_:information in 4687) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005345665 = score(doc=4687,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.055122808 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 4687, 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=4687)
      0.1875 = coord(3/16)
    
    Abstract
    The World Wide Web as it is currently constituted resembles a poorly mapped geography. Our insight into the documents and capabilities available are based on keyword searches, abetted by clever use of document connectivity and usage patterns. The sheer mass of this data is unmanageable without powerful tool support. In order to map this terrain more precisely, computational agents require machine-readable descriptions of the content and capabilities of Web accessible resources. These descriptions must be in addition to the human-readable versions of that information. The OWL Web Ontology Language is intended to provide a language that can be used to describe the classes and relations between them that are inherent in Web documents and applications. This document demonstrates the use of the OWL language to - formalize a domain by defining classes and properties of those classes, - define individuals and assert properties about them, and - reason about these classes and individuals to the degree permitted by the formal semantics of the OWL language. The sections are organized to present an incremental definition of a set of classes, properties and individuals, beginning with the fundamentals and proceeding to more complex language components.
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  3. Z39.67-1993: Computer software description (1993) 0.02
    0.015789391 = product of:
      0.12631513 = sum of:
        0.012829596 = weight(_text_:information in 8732) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012829596 = score(doc=8732,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.055122808 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 8732, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=8732)
        0.11348554 = weight(_text_:software in 8732) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11348554 = score(doc=8732,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.124570385 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.9110154 = fieldWeight in 8732, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=8732)
      0.125 = coord(2/16)
    
    Abstract
    Computer software can sometimes defy description! Z39.67 gives guidelines for unequivocally describing software in advertising, on the packaging and carrier and labels and on title screens
    Editor
    National Information Standards Organization
  4. Pepper, S.; Moore, G.; TopicMaps.Org Authoring Group: XML Topic Maps (XTM) 1.0 : TopicMaps.Org Specification (2001) 0.02
    0.015241774 = product of:
      0.08128946 = sum of:
        0.040864702 = weight(_text_:wide in 1623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040864702 = score(doc=1623,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13912784 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.29372054 = fieldWeight in 1623, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1623)
        0.031352866 = weight(_text_:web in 1623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031352866 = score(doc=1623,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.10247572 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.3059541 = fieldWeight in 1623, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1623)
        0.009071894 = weight(_text_:information in 1623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009071894 = score(doc=1623,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.055122808 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 1623, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1623)
      0.1875 = coord(3/16)
    
    Abstract
    This specification provides a model and grammar for representing the structure of information resources used to define topics, and the associations (relationships) between topics. Names, resources, and relationships are said to be characteristics of abstract subjects, which are called topics. Topics have their characteristics within scopes: i.e. the limited contexts within which the names and resources are regarded as their name, resource, and relationship characteristics. One or more interrelated documents employing this grammar is called a topic map.TopicMaps.Org is an independent consortium of parties developing the applicability of the topic map paradigm [ISO13250] to the World Wide Web by leveraging the XML family of specifications. This specification describes version 1.0 of XML Topic Maps (XTM) 1.0 [XTM], an abstract model and XML grammar for interchanging Web-based topic maps, written by the members of the TopicMaps.Org Authoring Group. More information on XTM and TopicMaps.Org is available at http://www.topicmaps.org/about.html. All versions of the XTM Specification are permanently licensed to the public, as provided by the Charter of TopicMaps.Org.
  5. Bechhofer, S.; Harmelen, F. van; Hendler, J.; Horrocks, I.; McGuinness, D.L.; Patel-Schneider, P.F.; Stein, L.A.: OWL Web Ontology Language Reference (2004) 0.01
    0.013188867 = product of:
      0.105510935 = sum of:
        0.04767549 = weight(_text_:wide in 4684) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04767549 = score(doc=4684,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13912784 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.342674 = fieldWeight in 4684, 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=4684)
        0.05783544 = weight(_text_:web in 4684) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05783544 = score(doc=4684,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.10247572 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.5643819 = fieldWeight in 4684, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4684)
      0.125 = coord(2/16)
    
    Abstract
    The Web Ontology Language OWL is a semantic markup language for publishing and sharing ontologies on the World Wide Web. OWL is developed as a vocabulary extension of RDF (the Resource Description Framework) and is derived from the DAML+OIL Web Ontology Language. This document contains a structured informal description of the full set of OWL language constructs and is meant to serve as a reference for OWL users who want to construct OWL ontologies.
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  6. OWL Web Ontology Language Use Cases and Requirements (2004) 0.01
    0.012850016 = product of:
      0.10280013 = sum of:
        0.05911953 = weight(_text_:web in 4686) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05911953 = score(doc=4686,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.10247572 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.5769126 = fieldWeight in 4686, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4686)
        0.043680605 = weight(_text_:software in 4686) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043680605 = score(doc=4686,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.124570385 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.35064998 = fieldWeight in 4686, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4686)
      0.125 = coord(2/16)
    
    Abstract
    This document specifies usage scenarios, goals and requirements for a web ontology language. An ontology formally defines a common set of terms that are used to describe and represent a domain. Ontologies can be used by automated tools to power advanced services such as more accurate web search, intelligent software agents and knowledge management.
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  7. Miller, E.; Schloss. B.; Lassila, O.; Swick, R.R.: Resource Description Framework (RDF) : model and syntax (1997) 0.01
    0.011849886 = product of:
      0.06319939 = sum of:
        0.038797192 = weight(_text_:web in 5903) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038797192 = score(doc=5903,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.10247572 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.37859887 = fieldWeight in 5903, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=5903)
        0.0052919383 = weight(_text_:information in 5903) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0052919383 = score(doc=5903,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.055122808 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.0960027 = fieldWeight in 5903, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=5903)
        0.019110262 = weight(_text_:software in 5903) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019110262 = score(doc=5903,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.124570385 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.15340936 = fieldWeight in 5903, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=5903)
      0.1875 = coord(3/16)
    
    Abstract
    RDF - the Resource Description Framework - is a foundation for processing metadata; it provides interoperability between applications that exchange machine-understandable information on the Web. RDF emphasizes facilities to enable automated processing of Web resources. RDF metadata can be used in a variety of application areas; for example: in resource discovery to provide better search engine capabilities; in cataloging for describing the content and content relationships available at a particular Web site, page, or digital library; by intelligent software agents to facilitate knowledge sharing and exchange; in content rating; in describing collections of pages that represent a single logical "document"; for describing intellectual property rights of Web pages, and in many others. RDF with digital signatures will be key to building the "Web of Trust" for electronic commerce, collaboration, and other applications. Metadata is "data about data" or specifically in the context of RDF "data describing web resources." The distinction between "data" and "metadata" is not an absolute one; it is a distinction created primarily by a particular application. Many times the same resource will be interpreted in both ways simultaneously. RDF encourages this view by using XML as the encoding syntax for the metadata. The resources being described by RDF are, in general, anything that can be named via a URI. The broad goal of RDF is to define a mechanism for describing resources that makes no assumptions about a particular application domain, nor defines the semantics of any application domain. The definition of the mechanism should be domain neutral, yet the mechanism should be suitable for describing information about any domain. This document introduces a model for representing RDF metadata and one syntax for expressing and transporting this metadata in a manner that maximizes the interoperability of independently developed web servers and clients. The syntax described in this document is best considered as a "serialization syntax" for the underlying RDF representation model. The serialization syntax is XML, XML being the W3C's work-in-progress to define a richer Web syntax for a variety of applications. RDF and XML are complementary; there will be alternate ways to represent the same RDF data model, some more suitable for direct human authoring. Future work may lead to including such alternatives in this document.
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  8. Z39.19-1993: Guidelines for the construction, format, and management of monolingual thesauri (1993) 0.01
    0.010730097 = product of:
      0.057227187 = sum of:
        0.014814342 = weight(_text_:information in 4092) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014814342 = score(doc=4092,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.055122808 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.2687516 = fieldWeight in 4092, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4092)
        0.025395533 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4092) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025395533 = score(doc=4092,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09498371 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 4092, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4092)
        0.017017314 = product of:
          0.03403463 = sum of:
            0.03403463 = weight(_text_:22 in 4092) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03403463 = score(doc=4092,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10995905 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.031400457 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4092, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4092)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.1875 = coord(3/16)
    
    Abstract
    This 1993 edition is the authoritative guide constructing single-language thesauri, one of the most powerful tools for information retrieval. Written by experts, Z39.19 shows how to formulate descriptors, establish relationships among terms, and present the information in print and on a screen. Also included are thesaurus maintenance procedures and recommended features for thesaurus management systems
    Editor
    National Information Standards Organization
    Footnote
    Rez. in: Knowledge organization 22(1995) no.3/4, S.180-181 (M. Hudon)
  9. OWL Web Ontology Language Test Cases (2004) 0.01
    0.01038937 = product of:
      0.08311496 = sum of:
        0.06609765 = weight(_text_:web in 4685) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06609765 = score(doc=4685,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.10247572 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.6450079 = fieldWeight in 4685, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4685)
        0.017017314 = product of:
          0.03403463 = sum of:
            0.03403463 = weight(_text_:22 in 4685) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03403463 = score(doc=4685,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10995905 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.031400457 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4685, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4685)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.125 = coord(2/16)
    
    Abstract
    This document contains and presents test cases for the Web Ontology Language (OWL) approved by the Web Ontology Working Group. Many of the test cases illustrate the correct usage of the Web Ontology Language (OWL), and the formal meaning of its constructs. Other test cases illustrate the resolution of issues considered by the Working Group. Conformance for OWL documents and OWL document checkers is specified.
    Date
    14. 8.2011 13:33:22
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  10. Z39.50: Information retrieval service and protocol : Information retrieval application service definition and protocol specification for open systems interaction (1992) 0.01
    0.009941407 = product of:
      0.07953125 = sum of:
        0.025659192 = weight(_text_:information in 2889) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025659192 = score(doc=2889,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.055122808 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.46549138 = fieldWeight in 2889, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2889)
        0.05387206 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2889) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05387206 = score(doc=2889,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.09498371 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.5671716 = fieldWeight in 2889, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2889)
      0.125 = coord(2/16)
    
    Editor
    National Information Standards Institution
    Imprint
    Bethesda, MD : National Information Standards Institution
  11. Z39.50: Information retrieval service and protocol : Information retrieval application service definition and protocol specification for open systems interaction (1995) 0.01
    0.009941407 = product of:
      0.07953125 = sum of:
        0.025659192 = weight(_text_:information in 4367) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025659192 = score(doc=4367,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.055122808 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.46549138 = fieldWeight in 4367, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4367)
        0.05387206 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4367) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05387206 = score(doc=4367,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.09498371 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.5671716 = fieldWeight in 4367, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4367)
      0.125 = coord(2/16)
    
    Editor
    National Information Standards Institution
    Imprint
    Bethesda, MD : National Information Standards Institution
  12. ISO 25964 Thesauri and interoperability with other vocabularies (2008) 0.01
    0.009680983 = product of:
      0.051631905 = sum of:
        0.0071719624 = weight(_text_:information in 1169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0071719624 = score(doc=1169,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.055122808 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.1301088 = fieldWeight in 1169, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1169)
        0.021294802 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021294802 = score(doc=1169,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.09498371 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.22419426 = fieldWeight in 1169, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1169)
        0.02316514 = weight(_text_:software in 1169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02316514 = score(doc=1169,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.124570385 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.18596025 = fieldWeight in 1169, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1169)
      0.1875 = coord(3/16)
    
    Abstract
    T.1: Today's thesauri are mostly electronic tools, having moved on from the paper-based era when thesaurus standards were first developed. They are built and maintained with the support of software and need to integrate with other software, such as search engines and content management systems. Whereas in the past thesauri were designed for information professionals trained in indexing and searching, today there is a demand for vocabularies that untrained users will find to be intuitive. ISO 25964 makes the transition needed for the world of electronic information management. However, part 1 retains the assumption that human intellect is usually involved in the selection of indexing terms and in the selection of search terms. If both the indexer and the searcher are guided to choose the same term for the same concept, then relevant documents will be retrieved. This is the main principle underlying thesaurus design, even though a thesaurus built for human users may also be applied in situations where computers make the choices. Efficient exchange of data is a vital component of thesaurus management and exploitation. Hence the inclusion in this standard of recommendations for exchange formats and protocols. Adoption of these will facilitate interoperability between thesaurus management systems and the other computer applications, such as indexing and retrieval systems, that will utilize the data. Thesauri are typically used in post-coordinate retrieval systems, but may also be applied to hierarchical directories, pre-coordinate indexes and classification systems. Increasingly, thesaurus applications need to mesh with others, such as automatic categorization schemes, free-text search systems, etc. Part 2 of ISO 25964 describes additional types of structured vocabulary and gives recommendations to enable interoperation of the vocabularies at all stages of the information storage and retrieval process.
    T.2: The ability to identify and locate relevant information among vast collections and other resources is a major and pressing challenge today. Several different types of vocabulary are in use for this purpose. Some of the most widely used vocabularies were designed a hundred years ago and have been evolving steadily. A different generation of vocabularies is now emerging, designed to exploit the electronic media more effectively. A good understanding of the previous generation is still essential for effective access to collections indexed with them. An important object of ISO 25964 as a whole is to support data exchange and other forms of interoperability in circumstances in which more than one structured vocabulary is applied within one retrieval system or network. Sometimes one vocabulary has to be mapped to another, and it is important to understand both the potential and the limitations of such mappings. In other systems, a thesaurus is mapped to a classification scheme, or an ontology to a thesaurus. Comprehensive interoperability needs to cover the whole range of vocabulary types, whether young or old. Concepts in different vocabularies are related only in that they have the same or similar meaning. However, the meaning can be found in a number of different aspects within each particular type of structured vocabulary: - within terms or captions selected in different languages; - in the notation assigned indicating a place within a larger hierarchy; - in the definition, scope notes, history notes and other notes that explain the significance of that concept; and - in explicit relationships to other concepts or entities within the same vocabulary. In order to create mappings from one structured vocabulary to another it is first necessary to understand, within the context of each different type of structured vocabulary, the significance and relative importance of each of the different elements in defining the meaning of that particular concept. ISO 25964-1 describes the key characteristics of thesauri along with additional advice on best practice. ISO 25964-2 focuses on other types of vocabulary and does not attempt to cover all aspects of good practice. It concentrates on those aspects which need to be understood if one of the vocabularies is to work effectively alongside one or more of the others. Recognizing that a new standard cannot be applied to some existing vocabularies, this part of ISO 25964 provides informative description alongside the recommendations, the aim of which is to enable users and system developers to interpret and implement the existing vocabularies effectively. The remainder of ISO 25964-2 deals with the principles and practicalities of establishing mappings between vocabularies.
    Issue
    Pt.1: Thesauri for information retrieval - Pt.2: Interoperability with other vocabularies.
  13. Z39.50-1988: Information retrieval service definition and protocol specification for library applications (1988) 0.01
    0.009372848 = product of:
      0.074982785 = sum of:
        0.024191719 = weight(_text_:information in 8730) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024191719 = score(doc=8730,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.055122808 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.43886948 = fieldWeight in 8730, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=8730)
        0.050791066 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 8730) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.050791066 = score(doc=8730,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09498371 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.5347345 = fieldWeight in 8730, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=8730)
      0.125 = coord(2/16)
    
    Editor
    National Information Standards Organization
  14. SKOS Simple Knowledge Organization System Primer (2009) 0.01
    0.009027196 = product of:
      0.07221757 = sum of:
        0.040864702 = weight(_text_:wide in 4795) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040864702 = score(doc=4795,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13912784 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.29372054 = fieldWeight in 4795, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4795)
        0.031352866 = weight(_text_:web in 4795) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031352866 = score(doc=4795,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.10247572 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.3059541 = fieldWeight in 4795, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4795)
      0.125 = coord(2/16)
    
    Abstract
    SKOS (Simple Knowledge Organisation System) provides a model for expressing the basic structure and content of concept schemes such as thesauri, classification schemes, subject heading lists, taxonomies, folksonomies, and other types of controlled vocabulary. As an application of the Resource Description Framework (RDF) SKOS allows concepts to be documented, linked and merged with other data, while still being composed, integrated and published on the World Wide Web. This document is an implementors guide for those who would like to represent their concept scheme using SKOS. In basic SKOS, conceptual resources (concepts) can be identified using URIs, labelled with strings in one or more natural languages, documented with various types of notes, semantically related to each other in informal hierarchies and association networks, and aggregated into distinct concept schemes. In advanced SKOS, conceptual resources can be mapped to conceptual resources in other schemes and grouped into labelled or ordered collections. Concept labels can also be related to each other. Finally, the SKOS vocabulary itself can be extended to suit the needs of particular communities of practice.
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  15. Erklärung zu den internationalen Katalogisierungsprinzipien (2009) 0.01
    0.008781648 = product of:
      0.070253186 = sum of:
        0.056416538 = weight(_text_:benutzer in 3286) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056416538 = score(doc=3286,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17907447 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.7029257 = idf(docFreq=400, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.31504512 = fieldWeight in 3286, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.7029257 = idf(docFreq=400, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3286)
        0.0138366455 = product of:
          0.027673291 = sum of:
            0.027673291 = weight(_text_:online in 3286) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.027673291 = score(doc=3286,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.09529729 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.031400457 = queryNorm
                0.29038906 = fieldWeight in 3286, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3286)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.125 = coord(2/16)
    
    Abstract
    Das "Statement of Principles" - allgemein bekannt als "Paris Principles" - wurde 1961 von der International Conference on Cataloguing Principles verabschiedet. Sein Ziel, als Basis für die internationale Standardisierung in der Katalogisierung zu dienen, ist sicherlich erreicht worden: Die meisten Katalogisierungsregelwerke, die in der Folgezeit weltweit entwickelt wurden, folgten den Prinzipien ganz oder wenigstens in hohem Maß. Mehr als vierzig Jahre später ist das Bedürfnis nach gemeinsamen internationalen Katalogisierungsregeln gewachsen, weil Katalogisierer und Benutzer weltweit OPACs (Online Public Access Catalogues = Online-Benutzerkataloge) nutzen. An der Schwelle des 21. Jahrhunderts hat die IFLA einen Vorstoß unternommen, neue Prinzipien zu erarbeiten, die auf Online-Bibliothekskataloge und auch darüber hinaus anwendbar sind. Das oberste Prinzip ist der Komfort des Katalognutzers. Diese Erklärung ersetzt die "Paris Principles" und weitet den Geltungsbereich von rein textlichen Werken auf alle Materialarten aus und von der Bestimmung und Form einer Eintragung auf alle Aspekte von bibliografischen Daten und Normdaten, die in Bibliothekskatalogen genutzt werden. Sie umfasst nicht nur Prinzipien und Ziele (d. h. Funktionen des Katalogs), sondern auch Regelungen, die international in Katalogisierungsregelwerken enthalten sein sollten, und gibt Anleitung für Suchfunktionen. Die Prinzipien bauen auf den großen Katalogtraditionen der Welt sowie auf dem konzeptionellen Modell der Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) der IFLA auf.
  16. Z39.50-1992: Information retrieval service definition and protocol (1992) 0.01
    0.008201242 = product of:
      0.06560994 = sum of:
        0.021167753 = weight(_text_:information in 8731) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021167753 = score(doc=8731,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.055122808 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.3840108 = fieldWeight in 8731, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=8731)
        0.044442184 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 8731) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.044442184 = score(doc=8731,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09498371 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.46789268 = fieldWeight in 8731, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=8731)
      0.125 = coord(2/16)
    
    Editor
    National Information Standards Organization
  17. OWL 2 Web Ontology Language Document Overview (2009) 0.01
    0.008164922 = product of:
      0.065319374 = sum of:
        0.05783544 = weight(_text_:web in 3060) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05783544 = score(doc=3060,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.10247572 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.5643819 = fieldWeight in 3060, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3060)
        0.0074839313 = weight(_text_:information in 3060) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0074839313 = score(doc=3060,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.055122808 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 3060, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3060)
      0.125 = coord(2/16)
    
    Abstract
    The OWL 2 Web Ontology Language, informally OWL 2, is an ontology language for the Semantic Web with formally defined meaning. OWL 2 ontologies provide classes, properties, individuals, and data values and are stored as Semantic Web documents. OWL 2 ontologies can be used along with information written in RDF, and OWL 2 ontologies themselves are primarily exchanged as RDF documents. This document serves as an introduction to OWL 2 and the various other OWL 2 documents. It describes the syntaxes for OWL 2, the different kinds of semantics, the available profiles (sub-languages), and the relationship between OWL 1 and OWL 2.
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  18. Bibliotheks- und Dokumentationswesen : Gestaltung und Erschließung von Dokumenten, Bibliotheksmanagement, Codierungs- und Nummerungssysteme, Bestandserhaltung in Archiven und Bibliotheken (2002) 0.01
    0.008093004 = product of:
      0.032372016 = sum of:
        0.011944887 = product of:
          0.023889774 = sum of:
            0.023889774 = weight(_text_:publizieren in 1704) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.023889774 = score(doc=1704,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.15493481 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.934158 = idf(docFreq=864, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.031400457 = queryNorm
                0.15419243 = fieldWeight in 1704, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  4.934158 = idf(docFreq=864, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1704)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.002138266 = weight(_text_:information in 1704) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.002138266 = score(doc=1704,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.055122808 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.03879095 = fieldWeight in 1704, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1704)
        0.010920151 = weight(_text_:software in 1704) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010920151 = score(doc=1704,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.124570385 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.087662496 = fieldWeight in 1704, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1704)
        0.007368713 = product of:
          0.014737426 = sum of:
            0.014737426 = weight(_text_:22 in 1704) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.014737426 = score(doc=1704,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.10995905 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.031400457 = queryNorm
                0.1340265 = fieldWeight in 1704, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1704)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(4/16)
    
    Abstract
    Am Anfang war das Wort. Sehr viel später erfand ein gewisser Herr Gutenberg ein Handgießinstrument zur Herstellung von Drucktypen. Und was sich daraus entwickelte, ist bekannt: Die moderne Informations- und Kommunikationsgesellschaft, deren Dynamik nicht zuletzt von der Effektivität der Daten-, Dokumenten- und Schriftgutverwaltung abhängt. Beim DIN-Taschenbuch 343 Bibliotheks- und Dokumentationswesen handelt es sich um ein Normenkompendium, das genau diese Verfahren aufgreift: Es stellt der interessierten Fachöffentlichkeit insgesamt 22 nationale und internationale Normen der Bereiche "Gestaltung und Erschließung von Dokumenten", "Bibliotheksmanagement", "Codierungs- und Nummerungssysteme" sowie "Bestandserhaltung in Archiven und Bibliotheken" vor. Die Auswahl der Normen verdeutlicht zweierlei: Zum einen den Einfluss der sich ständig weiterentwickelnden und dabei konvergierenden Technologien, der u.a. das Publizieren und die Datenrecherche beeinflusst. Zum zweiten die Notwendigkeit, neue Anforderungen zu berücksichtigen, die sich aus dem stetig zunehmenden internationalen Datenaustausch ergeben. Das DIN-Taschenbuch verschafft einen genauen Überblick über den Zusammenhang zwischen einschlägigen DIN- und ISO-Normen und klärt über Namencodes von Ländern und deren Untereinheiten auf (DIN ISO 3166-2:2001). Komplettiert wird das Werk durch den vollständigen Abdruck des DINFachberichts 13 "Bau- und Nutzungplanung von wissenschaftlichen Bibliotheken". Dort werden Bibliotheken als Servicezentren verstanden, die zunehmend digitalisierte Informationsquellen bereit stellen.
    Content
    Enthält 22 vollständig abgedruckte nationale und internationale Normen für die Bereiche Archiv-, Bibliotheks-, Dokumentations-, Museums- und Verlagswesen
    Footnote
    Rez. in: ABI-Technik 21(2002) H.3, S.294-295 (K. Weishaupt); "Im Deutschen Institut für Normung ist der Normenausschuss Bibliotheks- und Dokumentationswesen (NABD) verantwortlich für die nationale Normung für das Erstellen, Publizieren, Erschließen, Erhalten, Wiederauffinden, Vermitteln und die Nutzung von Dokumenten, Daten und Schriftgut für die Bereiche Archiv-, Bibliotheks, Dokumentations-, Museumsund Verlagswesen. Mit dem neuen DIN-Taschenbuch will er einen Überblick über die DIN-Normen geben, die in den letzten Jahren auf internationaler Ebene unter aktiver deutscher Mitarbeit veröffentlicht, dann als DIN-Normen übernommen worden sind und die den veränderten Anforderungen der Informations- und Kommunikationsgesellschaft Rechnung tragen - so die eigenen Angaben des Ausschusses im Vorwort (S. XI). Vor dem Hintergrund dieses recht offen formulierten Anspruches kommt es zu einer Zusammenstellung von 22 Normen, die auf den ersten Blick recht bunt gemischt wirkt: Abgedruckt sind Normen zur Erstellung und Weiterentwicklung von Thesauri, zu Titelangaben von Dokumenten, Kürzungs- und Transliterationsregeln, Sortierregeln, Abschnittsnummerierungen, Ländernamen, zur ISBN, ISSN sowie den Standardnummern ISMN und ISWC für Musikalien, zu Leistungsindikatoren für Bibliotheken und zu Lebensdauer-Klassen von Papier und Karton, Anforderungen an die Aufbewahrung von Archiv- und Bibliotheksgut und zur Alterungsbeständigkeit von Schriften. Der DIN-Fachbericht "Bau- und Nutzungsplanung von wissenschaftlichen Bibliotheken" rundet das Werk ab. Negativ ausgedrückt: Es wird niemanden geben, der für seinen beruflichen Alltag all diese Normen benötigt. Die positive Sicht: Das DIN-Taschenbuch deckt so viele Themen ab, dass der Kreis der Interessierten recht groß sein dürfte. Auf alle Fälle ist beeindruckend, zu wie vielen Themen aus den Bereich des Bibliotheks- und Dokumentationswesens es Normen gibt; vermutlich ist deren Existenz nicht einmal der Fachöffentlichkeit in vollem Umfang bekannt. Ein solches Beispiel ist DIN 1505, Teil 2: "Titelangaben von Dokumenten: Zitierregeln"; diese Norm wendet sich "an Autoren, Verleger und Redakteure und soll für Literaturzusammenstellungen, für Literaturverzeichnisse am Ende einer Schrift bzw. eines Beitrags, im Kontext oder in Fußnoten benutzt werden" (S. 38). Damit ist sie praktisch für alle relevant, die wissenschaftlich arbeiten und Texte schreiben - aber kaum jemand kennt diese Norm! Viele Zeitschriften und Fachgesellschaften haben ihre eigenen Regeln, nach denen zitiert werden soll. Im Institut Arbeit und Technik in Gelsenkirchen ist vor einigen Jahren mit Förderung der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft die Software LibLink entwickelt worden, mit der aus MAB-Daten, die aus einem Bibliothekskatalog exportiert worden waren, automatisiert Literaturverzeichnisse für wissenschaftliche Texte erstellt werden sollten.
    Das erwies sich als äußerst schwierig, da es erstens keinen allgemein anerkannten Standard fürs Zitieren gibt und zweitens zwischen Literaturverzeichnissen wissenschaftlicher Texte und Bibliotheksdaten Diskrepanzen bestehen, die nicht automatisiert bereinigt werden können. Wie sich im Laufe des Projektes gezeigt hat, gilt das auch für Literaturverzeichnisse, die nach DIN 1505 gestaltet werden, obwohl diese Norm im Zusammenarbeit mit der Deutschen Bibliothek und dokumentarischen Berufsverbänden entwickelt worden ist und eine eindeutige Nähe zu bibliothekarischen Katalogisierungsregeln aufweist Warum sich die Norm nicht durchgesetzt hat, darüber kann nur spekuliert werden. Möglich ist, dass der Text mit einem Umfang von 18 Seiten - allein für Teil 2 der Norm! - zu umfangreich ist, als dass sich jemand, der sich für Formalia des wissenschaftlichen Arbeitens nur am Rande interessiert, wirklich damit beschäftigen würde. Möglich ist ferner, dass das Zitierformat zu nah an bibliothekarische Regeln angelehnt ist und einige Gepflogenheiten wissenschaftlicher Literaturverzeichnisse, die sich bei aller Uneinheitlichkeit doch durchgesetzt haben - nicht ausreichend berücksichtigt: Die Tendenz geht zu einer recht knappen Zitierweise, außerdem steht das Erscheinungsjahr inzwischen fast immer direkt hinter der Verfasserangabe und nicht irgendwo am Ende einer langen Titelaufnahme. Wie dem auch sei: Es ist bedauerlich, dass die Regelungen der Norm so wenig bekannt sind und damit kaum als Hilfestellung bei der oft auch beklagten Unsicherheit, wie korrekt zu zitieren sei, angesehen werden können. Vielleicht wäre hier eine viel intensivere Öffentlichkeitsarbeit angesagt, der Abdruck in einem neuen DIN-Taschenbuch ist sicherlich ein Schritt in die richtige Richtung. Eine andere Maßnahme wäre eine Aktualisierung der Norm; immerhin ist sie seit Januar 1984 unverändert geblieben. Über Namensverfremdungen wie Ernst T. A. Hoffmann ist die Bibliothekswelt inzwischen hinaus; ob gerade solch eine Regelung der Abkürzung von Vornamen und die Aufführung dieses Beispiels die Akzeptanz der Norm fördern, erscheint mehr als fraglich. Es ist im Rahmen einer Rezension nicht möglich, auf jede einzelne abgedruckte Norm inhaltlich einzugehen, daher nur noch einige Bemerkungen zu besonderen Auffälligkeiten. Das Taschenbuch gibt die internationale Norm ISO 690-2 (in englischer Sprache) wieder: "Information and documentation - Bibliographic references - Part 2: Electronic documents or parts thereof". Bei solch einem Thema, bei dem noch allgemeine Unsicherheit herrscht, ist es sehr hilfreich, mit der Norm eine Richtschnur an die Hand zu bekommen, auch wenn der Text selbst realistischerweise nicht den Anspruch erhebt, das Problem abschließend zu behandeln. Auf ein ganz besonders schwieriges Gebiet haben sich die Normungsausschüsse vorgewagt, als sie die internationale Norm ISO 11620 "Leistungsindikatoren für Bibliotheken" entwickelt haben, die ins Deutsche übersetzt und unverändert als DIN-Norm übernommen worden ist. Der Zweck der Norm wird eher zurückhaltend formuliert: Es geht darum, "den Gebrauch von Leistungsindikatoren in Bibliotheken zu unterstützen und Kenntnisse über die Durchführung von Leistungsmessung zu verbreiten" (S. 171). Dabei wird ausdrücklich zugestanden, dass es auch Leistungsindikatoren geben kann, die in dieser Norm nicht aufgeführt sind. Eine sehr realistische und damit sympathische Sicht für eine Fragestellung, die eins der jüngsten Probleme der bibliothekarischen Berufspraxis berührt und vermutlich nie erschöpfend ausdiskutiert werden kann! Im Vergleich dazu wirken Abkürzungs-, Transliterations- und Ordnungsregeln geradezu trivial. Aber alle, die im Bibliotheks- und Dokumentationsbereich tätig sind, wissen, dass es ohne Sorgfalt im Kleinen nicht geht und exakte Regelungen die tägliche Arbeit eher erleichtern.
  19. Z39.4-199X: Indexes and related information retrieval devices (1993) 0.01
    0.007426256 = product of:
      0.059410047 = sum of:
        0.0149678625 = weight(_text_:information in 8518) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0149678625 = score(doc=8518,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.055122808 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 8518, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=8518)
        0.044442184 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 8518) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.044442184 = score(doc=8518,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09498371 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.46789268 = fieldWeight in 8518, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=8518)
      0.125 = coord(2/16)
    
  20. OWL Web Ontology Language Overview (2004) 0.01
    0.0066764425 = product of:
      0.05341154 = sum of:
        0.044339646 = weight(_text_:web in 4682) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.044339646 = score(doc=4682,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.10247572 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.43268442 = fieldWeight in 4682, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4682)
        0.009071894 = weight(_text_:information in 4682) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009071894 = score(doc=4682,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.055122808 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.031400457 = queryNorm
            0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 4682, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4682)
      0.125 = coord(2/16)
    
    Abstract
    The OWL Web Ontology Language is designed for use by applications that need to process the content of information instead of just presenting information to humans. OWL facilitates greater machine interpretability of Web content than that supported by XML, RDF, and RDF Schema (RDF-S) by providing additional vocabulary along with a formal semantics. OWL has three increasingly-expressive sublanguages: OWL Lite, OWL DL, and OWL Full. This document is written for readers who want a first impression of the capabilities of OWL. It provides an introduction to OWL by informally describing the features of each of the sublanguages of OWL. Some knowledge of RDF Schema is useful for understanding this document, but not essential. After this document, interested readers may turn to the OWL Guide for more detailed descriptions and extensive examples on the features of OWL. The normative formal definition of OWL can be found in the OWL Semantics and Abstract Syntax.
    Theme
    Semantic Web