Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

0.029602587 = product of:
  0.08880776 = sum of:
    0.015386774 = weight(_text_:und in 3732) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015386774 = score(doc=3732,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.104724824 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04725067 = queryNorm
        0.14692576 = fieldWeight in 3732, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3732)
    0.07342099 = weight(_text_:anwendung in 3732) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07342099 = score(doc=3732,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22876309 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04725067 = queryNorm
        0.3209477 = fieldWeight in 3732, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3732)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

Seit einiger Zeit stellen Bibliotheken ihre bibliografischen Metadadaten verstärkt offen in Form von Linked Data zur Verfügung. Dabei kommen jedoch ganz unterschiedliche Modelle für die Strukturierung der bibliografischen Daten zur Anwendung. Manche Bibliotheken verwenden ein auf FRBR basierendes Modell mit mehreren Schichten von Entitäten, während andere flache, am Datensatz orientierte Modelle nutzen. Der Wildwuchs bei den Datenmodellen erschwert die Nachnutzung der bibliografischen Daten. Im Ergebnis haben die Bibliotheken die früheren MARC-Silos nur mit zueinander inkompatiblen Linked-Data-Silos vertauscht. Deshalb ist es häufig schwierig, Datensets miteinander zu kombinieren und nachzunutzen. Kleinere Unterschiede in der Datenmodellierung lassen sich zwar durch Schema Mappings in den Griff bekommen, doch erscheint es fraglich, ob die Interoperabilität insgesamt zugenommen hat. Der Beitrag stellt die Ergebnisse einer Studie zu verschiedenen veröffentlichten Sets von bibliografischen Daten vor. Dabei werden auch die unterschiedlichen Modelle betrachtet, um bibliografische Daten als RDF darzustellen, sowie Werkzeuge zur Erzeugung von entsprechenden Daten aus dem MARC-Format. Abschließend wird der von der Finnischen Nationalbibliothek verfolgte Ansatz behandelt.

0.004645029 = product of:
  0.027870173 = sum of:
    0.027870173 = product of:
      0.055740345 = sum of:
        0.055740345 = weight(_text_:thesaurus in 3707) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.055740345 = score(doc=3707,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21834905 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6210785 = idf(docFreq=1182, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04725067 = queryNorm
            0.2552809 = fieldWeight in 3707, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6210785 = idf(docFreq=1182, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3707)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is threefold: to focus on the process of multilingual concept scheme construction and the challenges involved; to addresses concrete challenges faced in the construction process and especially those related to equivalence between terms and concepts; and to briefly outlines the translation strategies developed during the process of concept scheme construction. Design/methodology/approach The analysis is based on experience acquired during the establishment of the Finnish thesaurus and ontology service Finto as well as the trilingual General Finnish Ontology YSO, both of which are being maintained and further developed at the National Library of Finland. Findings Although uniform resource identifiers can be considered language-independent, they do not render concept schemes and their construction free of language-related challenges. The fundamental issue with all the challenges faced is how to maintain consistency and predictability when the nature of language requires each concept to be treated individually. The key to such challenges is to recognise the function of the vocabulary and the needs of its intended users. Social implications Open science increases the transparency of not only research products, but also metadata tools. Gaining a deeper understanding of the challenges involved in their construction is important for a great variety of users - e.g. indexers, vocabulary builders and information seekers. Today, multilingualism is an essential aspect at both the national and international information society level. Originality/value This paper draws on the practical challenges faced in concept scheme construction in a trilingual environment, with a focus on "concept scheme" as a translation and mapping unit.