Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Metadaten"
  • × author_ss:"Chan, L.M."
  1. Chan, L.M.; Childress, E.; Dean, R.; O'Neill, E.T.; Vizine-Goetz, D.: ¬A faceted approach to subject data in the Dublin Core metadata record (2001) 0.00 
    0.0017447417 = product of:
  0.020064529 = sum of:
    0.014564968 = weight(_text_:im in 6109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014564968 = score(doc=6109,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.066621356 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.2186231 = fieldWeight in 6109, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6109)
    0.005499561 = product of:
      0.010999122 = sum of:
        0.010999122 = weight(_text_:1 in 6109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010999122 = score(doc=6109,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.18998542 = fieldWeight in 6109, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6109)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.08695652 = coord(2/23)
    Source
    Journal of Internet cataloging. 4(2001) nos.1/2, S.35-47
    Theme
    Klassifikationssysteme im Online-Retrieval
  2. Chan, L.M.; Zeng, M.L.: Metadata interoperability and standardization - a study of methodology, part II : achieving interoperability at the record and repository levels (2006) 0.00 
    1.3663506E-4 = product of:
  0.0031426062 = sum of:
    0.0031426062 = product of:
      0.0062852125 = sum of:
        0.0062852125 = weight(_text_:1 in 1177) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0062852125 = score(doc=1177,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.1085631 = fieldWeight in 1177, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1177)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
    Abstract
    This is the second part of an analysis of the methods that have been used to achieve or improve interoperability among metadata schemas and their applications in order to facilitate the conversion and exchange of metadata and to enable cross-domain metadata harvesting and federated searches. From a methodological point of view, implementing interoperability may be considered at different levels of operation: schema level (discussed in Part I of the article), record level (discussed in Part II of the article), and repository level (also discussed in Part II). The results of efforts to improve interoperability may be observed from different perspectives as well, including element-based and value-based approaches. As discussed in Part I of this study, the results of efforts to improve interoperability can be observed at different levels: 1. Schema level - Efforts are focused on the elements of the schemas, being independent of any applications. The results usually appear as derived element sets or encoded schemas, crosswalks, application profiles, and element registries. 2. Record level - Efforts are intended to integrate the metadata records through the mapping of the elements according to the semantic meanings of these elements. Common results include converted records and new records resulting from combining values of existing records. 3. Repository level - With harvested or integrated records from varying sources, efforts at this level focus on mapping value strings associated with particular elements (e.g., terms associated with subject or format elements). The results enable cross-collection searching. In the following sections, we will continue to analyze interoperability efforts and methodologies, focusing on the record level and the repository level. It should be noted that the models to be discussed in this article are not always mutually exclusive. Sometimes, within a particular project, more than one method may be used.

Authors

Types