Search (19 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Auszeichnungssprachen"
  • × type_ss:"a"
  1. Patrick, D.A.: XML in der Praxis : Unternehmensübergreifende Vorteile durch Enterprise Content Management (1999) 0.01 
    0.008195178 = product of:
  0.06146383 = sum of:
    0.022018395 = weight(_text_:und in 1461) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022018395 = score(doc=1461,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.34282678 = fieldWeight in 1461, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1461)
    0.039445434 = sum of:
      0.011962548 = weight(_text_:information in 1461) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.011962548 = score(doc=1461,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.028978055 = queryNorm
          0.23515764 = fieldWeight in 1461, 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=1461)
      0.027482886 = weight(_text_:22 in 1461) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.027482886 = score(doc=1461,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.101476215 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.028978055 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1461, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1461)
  0.13333334 = coord(2/15)
    Abstract
    In dem Maße, in dem Unternehmen ihren Erfolg in einem zunehmend von Konkurrenz geprägten Weltmarkt suchen, ist ds Content Management als Informationslösung interessant geworden. Content Management-Systeme können dabei helfen, die enormen betrieblichen Investitionen in die Information zu verringern. Wie bei jeder neuartigen Technologie bestehen auch hier noch keine klaren Vorstellungen darüber, was ContentnManagement eigentlich ausmacht. In diesem Beitrag werden die Probleme und Technologien im Zusammenhang mit dem Content Management untersucht und der aktuelle Stand in Sachen Content Management beschrieben. Content Management ist mehr als nur eine neue Technologie. Im Kern erlaubt Content Management Unternehmen, Informationen zum aufbau intensiverer Beziehungen entlang der Wertschöpfungskette aufzubauen, wobei Kunden, Vertriebspartner, Zulieferer und Hersteller verbunden werden
    Date
    30. 3.2003 10:50:22
    Source
    nfd Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 50(1999) H.1, S.5-12
    Theme
    Information Resources Management
  2. as: XML: Extensible Markup Language : I: Was ist XML? (2001) 0.01 
    0.0055830097 = product of:
  0.041872572 = sum of:
    0.022241939 = weight(_text_:und in 4950) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022241939 = score(doc=4950,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.34630734 = fieldWeight in 4950, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4950)
    0.019630633 = product of:
      0.039261267 = sum of:
        0.039261267 = weight(_text_:22 in 4950) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039261267 = score(doc=4950,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.101476215 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4950, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4950)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.13333334 = coord(2/15)
    Abstract
    Was ist das - eine neue Programmiersprache für das Internet etwa? Und wofür braucht man das? Ob und wie Sie von XML profitieren können, erfahren Sie in unserem dreiteiligen Workshop
    Date
    30. 3.2003 11:06:22
  3. Schröder, A.: Web der Zukunft : RDF - Der erste Schritt zum semantischen Web 0.00 
    0.004466408 = product of:
  0.033498056 = sum of:
    0.017793551 = weight(_text_:und in 1457) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017793551 = score(doc=1457,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.27704588 = fieldWeight in 1457, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1457)
    0.015704507 = product of:
      0.031409014 = sum of:
        0.031409014 = weight(_text_:22 in 1457) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031409014 = score(doc=1457,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.101476215 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1457, 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=1457)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.13333334 = coord(2/15)
    Abstract
    Seit dem 22. Februar 1999 ist das Resource Description Framework (RDF) als W3C-Empfehlung verfügbar. Doch was steckt hinter diesem Standard, der das Zeitalter des Semantischen Webs einläuten soll? Was RDF bedeutet, wozu man es einsetzt, welche Vorteile es gegenüber XML hat und wie man RDF anwendet, soll in diesem Artikel erläutert werden.
    Source
    XML Magazin und Web Services. 2003, H.1, S.40-43
  4. Barthelmes, C.: Darstellungsmöglichkeiten von Musik mithilfe ausgewählter Musikbeschreibungssprachen (2003) 0.00 
    0.0036105986 = product of:
  0.02707949 = sum of:
    0.023591138 = weight(_text_:und in 1831) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023591138 = score(doc=1831,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.3673144 = fieldWeight in 1831, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1831)
    0.0034883497 = product of:
      0.0069766995 = sum of:
        0.0069766995 = weight(_text_:information in 1831) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0069766995 = score(doc=1831,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 1831, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1831)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.13333334 = coord(2/15)
    Abstract
    Musik wird in ihrer klanglichen und teilweise sogar in ihrer visuellen Gestalt (Notenbild) bereits elektronisch festgehalten. Meist handelt es sich jedoch um Klangformate wie wav, au oder midi bzw. um Bilddateien wie jpeg oder gif. Diese lassen sich abspielen bzw. betrachten, aber sie lassen keine gezielten Interaktionen oder Recherchen innerhalb des Materials zu. Die Herausforderung besteht darin, durch Zugriff auf die einzelnen musikbezogenen Elemente und die Potenz ihrer Veränderbarkeit Möglichkeiten der Datengestaltung und vielfältigen Datennutzung bereitzustellen. Könnten nicht sämtliche notwendigen musikrelevanten Informationen in einem Datenformat so gespeichert werden, dass je nach Zielsetzung Notenbilder oder Klänge erzeugt oder dass einzelne Motive gefunden oder musikalische Zusammenhänge entdeckt werden können? Mit verschiedenen Musikbeschreibungssprachen soll dies erreicht werden. Welche Parameter müssen oder sollten als musikrelevantes Material Berücksichtigung finden? Der erste Teil (1.) wird verdeutlichen, welche Schwierigkeiten sich hier auftun. Danach soll ein Überblick (2.) zeigen, welche Zielvorstellungen bisherige Formate verfolgen. In den letzten 30 Jahren entstand eine Vielzahl von Formaten (insgesamt etwa 100). Dennoch ist die Entwicklung längst nicht abgeschlossen, und die Speicher- und Präsentationsmöglichkeiten der Musikbibliotheken, -dokumentationen und -archive nutzen diese Potenziale noch nicht. Für eine dokumentarische Nutzung solcher Musikbeschreibungen sind zudem verschiedene Voraussetzungen zu erfüllen. Gemessen am aufgestellten Maßstab sind für den Bibliotheks- und Dokumentationsbereich nur noch einige brauchbar. Ausgehend von einer weltumspannenden, aktuellen Forschung bei gleichzeitig offensichtlich geringer Präsenz von deutschen Spezialisten der Information und Dokumentation will dieser Beitrag eine Orientierung zur aktiven Mitgestaltung dieses Gebiets ermöglichen.
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 54(2003) H.6, S.349-356
  5. Geeb, F.: Lexikographische Informationsstrukturierung mit XML (2003) 0.00 
    0.0034318906 = product of:
  0.025739178 = sum of:
    0.02179256 = weight(_text_:und in 1842) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02179256 = score(doc=1842,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.33931053 = fieldWeight in 1842, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1842)
    0.0039466172 = product of:
      0.0078932345 = sum of:
        0.0078932345 = weight(_text_:information in 1842) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0078932345 = score(doc=1842,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 1842, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1842)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.13333334 = coord(2/15)
    Abstract
    Die Metalexikographie erarbeitet Theorien und Modelle für die Strukturierung lexikographischer Informationen in der Form von Nachschlagewerken (gedruckt oder online). Mit dem Aufkommen von XML steht ein weiteres, besonders wirkungsvolles Werkzeug für die Darstellung dieser Strukturen zur Verfügung. Die lexikographische Auszeichnungssprache leXeML ist ein Versuch, die lexikographische Theoriebildung in ein konkretes und anwendbares Werkzeug zur Informationsstrukturierung umzusetzen.
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 54(2003) H.7, S.415-420
  6. Trotman, A.: Searching structured documents (2004) 0.00 
    0.0026296957 = product of:
  0.039445434 = sum of:
    0.039445434 = sum of:
      0.011962548 = weight(_text_:information in 2538) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.011962548 = score(doc=2538,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.028978055 = queryNorm
          0.23515764 = fieldWeight in 2538, 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=2538)
      0.027482886 = weight(_text_:22 in 2538) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.027482886 = score(doc=2538,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.101476215 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.028978055 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2538, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2538)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    Abstract
    Structured document interchange formats such as XML and SGML are ubiquitous, however, information retrieval systems supporting structured searching are not. Structured searching can result in increased precision. A search for the author "Smith" in an unstructured corpus of documents specializing in iron-working could have a lower precision than a structured search for "Smith as author" in the same corpus. Analysis of XML retrieval languages identifies additional functionality that must be supported including searching at, and broken across multiple nodes in the document tree. A data structure is developed to support structured document searching. Application of this structure to information retrieval is then demonstrated. Document ranking is examined and adapted specifically for structured searching.
    Date
    14. 8.2004 10:39:22
    Source
    Information processing and management. 40(2004) no.4, S.619-632
  7. Bold, M.: ¬Die Zukunft des Web : Standards für das Web der Zukunft (2004) 0.00 
    0.001482796 = product of:
  0.022241939 = sum of:
    0.022241939 = weight(_text_:und in 1725) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022241939 = score(doc=1725,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.34630734 = fieldWeight in 1725, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1725)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    Abstract
    Neue Technologien und Standards sollen die Zukunft des Web prägen. Internet Professionell erklärt, was es mit XML, XSLT, XHTML, XPath und XLink auf sich hat
  8. Ioannides, D.: XML schema languages : beyond DTD (2000) 0.00 
    7.852253E-4 = product of:
  0.011778379 = sum of:
    0.011778379 = product of:
      0.023556758 = sum of:
        0.023556758 = weight(_text_:22 in 720) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023556758 = score(doc=720,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.101476215 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 720, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=720)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    Date
    28. 1.2006 19:01:22
  9. Qin, J.: Representation and organization of information in the Web space : from MARC to XML (2000) 0.00 
    3.9466174E-4 = product of:
  0.005919926 = sum of:
    0.005919926 = product of:
      0.011839852 = sum of:
        0.011839852 = weight(_text_:information in 3918) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011839852 = score(doc=3918,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 3918, 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=3918)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
  10. Pharo, N.: ¬The effect of granularity and order in XML element retrieval (2008) 0.00 
    3.7209064E-4 = product of:
  0.0055813594 = sum of:
    0.0055813594 = product of:
      0.011162719 = sum of:
        0.011162719 = weight(_text_:information in 2118) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011162719 = score(doc=2118,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 2118, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2118)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    Abstract
    The article presents an analysis of the effect of granularity and order in an XML encoded collection of full text journal articles. Two-hundred and eighteen sessions of searchers performing simulated work tasks in the collection have been analysed. The results show that searchers prefer to use smaller sections of the article as their source of information. In interaction sessions during which articles are assessed, however, they are to a large degree evaluated as more important than the articles' sections and subsections.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 44(2008) no.5, S.1732-1740
  11. Clarke, K.S.: Extensible Markup Language (XML) (2009) 0.00 
    3.4178712E-4 = product of:
  0.0051268064 = sum of:
    0.0051268064 = product of:
      0.010253613 = sum of:
        0.010253613 = weight(_text_:information in 3781) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010253613 = score(doc=3781,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 3781, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3781)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    Abstract
    XML, the Extensible Markup Language is a syntax for tagging, or marking-up, textual information. It is a standard, established by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) that many use when sharing or working with structured information. XML isn't used by itself, but as a tool to create other data-specific markup languages. One benefit to using XML is that it enables these languages to distinguish the content that is being marked up from its presentation, allowing for greater flexibility and data reuse. The library community has embraced XML and uses it as the foundation for many of their own data-specific markup languages. Perhaps the greatest strength of XML is that it is very easy to start working with and yet, in conjunction with many other XML-related standards and technologies, can also be used to develop complex applications.
    Source
    Encyclopedia of library and information sciences. 3rd ed. Ed.: M.J. Bates
  12. Chang, M.: ¬An electronic finding aid using extensible markup language (XML) and encoded archival description (EAD) (2000) 0.00 
    3.255793E-4 = product of:
  0.0048836893 = sum of:
    0.0048836893 = product of:
      0.009767379 = sum of:
        0.009767379 = weight(_text_:information in 4886) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009767379 = score(doc=4886,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 4886, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4886)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    Abstract
    Increasingly, XML applications are appearing on the World Wide Web, from e-commerce to information management. In the case of libraries and archives, XML enables more flexible information management and retrieval than using MARC or a relational database management system. Describes a project to explore the use of XML and the EAD, and the development of a prototype electronic finding aid. It focuses on the technical aspects, and reviews the options available and the choices made. This is done within the setting of a small- to medium-sized archive with minimal tools and resources.
  13. Salgáné, M.M.: Our electronic era and bibliographic informations computer-related bibliographic data formats, metadata formats and BDML (2005) 0.00 
    2.941635E-4 = product of:
  0.004412452 = sum of:
    0.004412452 = product of:
      0.008824904 = sum of:
        0.008824904 = weight(_text_:information in 3005) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008824904 = score(doc=3005,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    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
  14. Vanhoutte, E.; Branden, R. van den: Text Encoding Initiative (TEI) (2009) 0.00 
    2.6310782E-4 = product of:
  0.0039466172 = sum of:
    0.0039466172 = product of:
      0.0078932345 = sum of:
        0.0078932345 = weight(_text_:information in 3889) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0078932345 = score(doc=3889,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 3889, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3889)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    Source
    Encyclopedia of library and information sciences. 3rd ed. Ed.: M.J. Bates
  15. Mayo, D.; Bowers, K.: ¬The devil's shoehorn : a case study of EAD to ArchivesSpace migration at a large university (2017) 0.00 
    2.3255666E-4 = product of:
  0.0034883497 = sum of:
    0.0034883497 = product of:
      0.0069766995 = sum of:
        0.0069766995 = weight(_text_:information in 3373) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0069766995 = score(doc=3373,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 3373, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3373)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    Abstract
    A band of archivists and IT professionals at Harvard took on a project to convert nearly two million descriptions of archival collection components from marked-up text into the ArchivesSpace archival metadata management system. Starting in the mid-1990s, Harvard was an alpha implementer of EAD, an SGML (later XML) text markup language for electronic inventories, indexes, and finding aids that archivists use to wend their way through the sometimes quirky filing systems that bureaucracies establish for their records or the utter chaos in which some individuals keep their personal archives. These pathfinder documents, designed to cope with messy reality, can themselves be difficult to classify. Portions of them are rigorously structured, while other parts are narrative. Early documents predate the establishment of the standard; many feature idiosyncratic encoding that had been through several machine conversions, while others were freshly encoded and fairly consistent. In this paper, we will cover the practical and technical challenges involved in preparing a large (900MiB) corpus of XML for ingest into an open-source archival information system (ArchivesSpace). This case study will give an overview of the project, discuss problem discovery and problem solving, and address the technical challenges, analysis, solutions, and decisions and provide information on the tools produced and lessons learned. The authors of this piece are Kate Bowers, Collections Services Archivist for Metadata, Systems, and Standards at the Harvard University Archive, and Dave Mayo, a Digital Library Software Engineer for Harvard's Library and Technology Services. Kate was heavily involved in both metadata analysis and later problem solving, while Dave was the sole full-time developer assigned to the migration project.
  16. Peis, E.; Moya, F. de; Fernández-Molina, J.C.: Encoded archival description (EAD) conversion : a methodological proposal (2000) 0.00 
    2.3021935E-4 = product of:
  0.00345329 = sum of:
    0.00345329 = product of:
      0.00690658 = sum of:
        0.00690658 = weight(_text_:information in 4899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00690658 = score(doc=4899,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 4899, 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=4899)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    Abstract
    The eventual adaptation of archives to new technological possibilities could begin with the creation of digital versions of archival finding aids, which would allow the international diffusion of descriptive information. The Standard Generalized Markup Language (SGML), document type definition (DTD) for archival description known as encoded archival description (EAD) is an appropriate tool for this purpose. Presents a methodological strategy that begins with an analysis of EAD and the informational object to be marked up, allowing the semiautomatic creation of a digital version.
  17. Wusteman, J.: Document Type Definition (DTD) (2009) 0.00 
    2.3021935E-4 = product of:
  0.00345329 = sum of:
    0.00345329 = product of:
      0.00690658 = sum of:
        0.00690658 = weight(_text_:information in 3766) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00690658 = score(doc=3766,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 3766, 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=3766)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    Source
    Encyclopedia of library and information sciences. 3rd ed. Ed.: M.J. Bates
  18. Salminen, A.: Modeling documents in their context (2009) 0.00 
    2.3021935E-4 = product of:
  0.00345329 = sum of:
    0.00345329 = product of:
      0.00690658 = sum of:
        0.00690658 = weight(_text_:information in 3847) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00690658 = score(doc=3847,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 3847, 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=3847)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    Source
    Encyclopedia of library and information sciences. 3rd ed. Ed.: M.J. Bates
  19. Salminen, A.: Markup languages (2009) 0.00 
    1.9733087E-4 = product of:
  0.002959963 = sum of:
    0.002959963 = product of:
      0.005919926 = sum of:
        0.005919926 = weight(_text_:information in 3849) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005919926 = score(doc=3849,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 3849, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3849)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    Source
    Encyclopedia of library and information sciences. 3rd ed. Ed.: M.J. Bates

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 13
  • d 6

Themes