Search (31 results, page 1 of 2)

0.051917527 = product of:
  0.103835054 = sum of:
    0.103835054 = sum of:
      0.06854186 = weight(_text_:web in 6959) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06854186 = score(doc=6959,freq=10.0), product of:
          0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.40312994 = fieldWeight in 6959, product of:
            3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
              10.0 = termFreq=10.0
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6959)
      0.03529319 = weight(_text_:22 in 6959) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03529319 = score(doc=6959,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18244034 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 6959, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6959)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The success of the World Wide Web Shows that we can access, search, and retrieve information from globally distributed databases. lf a database, such as a library catalog, has some sort of Web-based front end, we can type its URL into a Web browser and use its HTML-based forms to search for items in that database. Depending an how well the query conforms to the database content, how the search engine interprets the query, and how the server formats the results into HTML, we might actually find something usable. While the first two issues depend an ourselves and the server, an the Web the latter falls to the mercy of HTML, which we all know as a great destroyer of information because it codes for display but not for content description. When looking at an HTML-formatted display, we must depend an our own interpretation to recognize such entities as author names, titles, and subject identifiers. The Web browser can do nothing but display the information. lf we want some other view of the result, such as sorting the records by date (provided it offers such an option to begin with), the server must do it. This makes poor use of the computing power we have at the desktop (or even laptop), which, unless it involves retrieving more records, could easily do the result Set manipulation that we currently send back to the server. Despite having personal computers wich immense computational power, as far as information retrieval goes, we still essentially use them as dumb terminals.

Date

22. 9.1997 19:16:05

0.046162233 = product of:
  0.092324466 = sum of:
    0.092324466 = sum of:
      0.042913996 = weight(_text_:web in 4866) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042913996 = score(doc=4866,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.25239927 = fieldWeight in 4866, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4866)
      0.049410466 = weight(_text_:22 in 4866) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049410466 = score(doc=4866,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18244034 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4866, 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=4866)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Information subject gateways provide targeted discovery services for their users, giving access to Web resources selected according to quality and subject coverage criteria. Information gateways recognise that they must collaborate on a wide range of issues relating to content to ensure continued success. This report is informed by discussion of content activities at the 1999 Imesh Workshop. The author considers the implications for subject based gateways of co-operation regarding coverage policy, creation of metadata, and provision of searching and browsing across services. Other possibilities for co-operation include working more closely with information providers, and diclosure of information in joint metadata registries

Date

22. 6.2002 19:38:54

0.04028248 = product of:
  0.08056496 = sum of:
    0.08056496 = sum of:
      0.030652853 = weight(_text_:web in 5801) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.030652853 = score(doc=5801,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 5801, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5801)
      0.049912106 = weight(_text_:22 in 5801) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049912106 = score(doc=5801,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.18244034 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 5801, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5801)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 6.2002 19:42:22

0.039567623 = product of:
  0.07913525 = sum of:
    0.07913525 = sum of:
      0.03678342 = weight(_text_:web in 5271) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03678342 = score(doc=5271,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 5271, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5271)
      0.042351827 = weight(_text_:22 in 5271) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042351827 = score(doc=5271,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18244034 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5271, 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=5271)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Federated search and distributed information retrieval systems provide a single user interface for searching multiple full-text search engines. They have been an active area of research for more than a decade, but in spite of their success as a research topic, they are still rare in operational environments. This article discusses a prototype federated search system developed for the U.S. government's FedStats Web portal, and the issues addressed in adapting research solutions to this operational environment. A series of experiments explore how well prior research results, parameter settings, and heuristics apply in the FedStats environment. The article concludes with a set of lessons learned from this technology transfer effort, including observations about search engine quality in the real world.

Date

22. 7.2006 16:02:07

0.02838494 = product of:
  0.05676988 = sum of:
    0.05676988 = product of:
      0.11353976 = sum of:
        0.11353976 = weight(_text_:web in 5813) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11353976 = score(doc=5813,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052098576 = queryNorm
            0.6677857 = fieldWeight in 5813, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5813)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In diesem Kapitel werden Anwendungsgebiete und Ansätze für die semantische Beschreibung von Web Services behandelt. Bestehende Web Service Technologien leisten einen entscheidenden Beitrag zur Entwicklung verteilter Anwendungen dadurch, dass weithin akzeptierte Standards vorliegen, die die Kommunikation zwischen Anwendungen bestimmen und womit deren Kombination zu komplexeren Einheiten ermöglicht wird. Automatisierte Mechanismen zum Auffinden geeigneter Web Services und deren Komposition dagegen werden von bestehenden Technologien in vergleichsweise geringem Maß unterstützt. Ähnlich wie bei der Annotation statischer Daten im "Semantic Web" setzen Forschung und Industrie große Hoffnungen in die semantische Beschreibung von Web Services zur weitgehenden Automatisierung dieser Aufgaben.

Source

Semantic Web: Wege zur vernetzten Wissensgesellschaft. Hrsg.: T. Pellegrini, u. A. Blumauer

0.021175914 = product of:
  0.042351827 = sum of:
    0.042351827 = product of:
      0.084703654 = sum of:
        0.084703654 = weight(_text_:22 in 4865) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.084703654 = score(doc=4865,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18244034 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052098576 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 4865, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4865)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 6.2002 19:41:59

0.01839171 = product of:
  0.03678342 = sum of:
    0.03678342 = product of:
      0.07356684 = sum of:
        0.07356684 = weight(_text_:web in 6096) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07356684 = score(doc=6096,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052098576 = queryNorm
            0.43268442 = fieldWeight in 6096, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6096)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.01839171 = product of:
  0.03678342 = sum of:
    0.03678342 = product of:
      0.07356684 = sum of:
        0.07356684 = weight(_text_:web in 3597) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07356684 = score(doc=3597,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052098576 = queryNorm
            0.43268442 = fieldWeight in 3597, 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=3597)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

User demands to have access to complete and actual information about research may require integration of data from different CRISs. CRISs are rarely homogenous systems and problems of CRISs integration must be addressed from technological point of view. Implementation of CRIS providing access to heterogeneous data distributed among a number of CRISs is described. A few technologies - distributed databases, web services, semantic web are used for distributed CRIS to address different user requirements. Distributed databases serve to implement very efficient integration of homogenous systems, web services - to provide open access to research information, semantic web - to solve problems of integration semantically and structurally heterogeneous data sources and provide intelligent data retrieval interfaces. The problems of data completeness in distributed systems are addressed and CRIS-adequate solution for data completeness is suggested.

0.017677099 = product of:
  0.035354197 = sum of:
    0.035354197 = sum of:
      0.02123692 = weight(_text_:web in 3964) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02123692 = score(doc=3964,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.12490524 = fieldWeight in 3964, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=3964)
      0.014117276 = weight(_text_:22 in 3964) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.014117276 = score(doc=3964,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18244034 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052098576 = queryNorm
          0.07738023 = fieldWeight in 3964, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=3964)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Enthält die Beiträge: Devadason, F.J., N. Intaraksa u. P. Patamawongjariya u.a.: Faceted indexing application for organizing and accessing internet resources; Nicholson, D., S. Wake: HILT: subject retrieval in a distributed environment; Olson, T.: Integrating LCSH and MeSH in information systems; Kuhr, P.S.: Putting the world back together: mapping multiple vocabularies into a single thesaurus; Freyre, E., M. Naudi: MACS : subject access across languages and networks; McIlwaine, I.C.: The UDC and the World Wide Web; Garrison, W.A.: The Colorado Digitization Project: subject access issues; Vizine-Goetz, D., R. Thompson: Towards DDC-classified displays of Netfirst search results: subject access issues; Godby, C.J., J. Stuler: The Library of Congress Classification as a knowledge base for automatic subject categorization: subject access issues; O'Neill, E.T., E. Childress u. R. Dean u.a.: FAST: faceted application of subject terminology; Bean, C.A., R. Green: Improving subject retrieval with frame representation; Zeng, M.L., Y. Chen: Features of an integrated thesaurus management and search system for the networked environment; Hudon, M.: Subject access to Web resources in education; Qin, J., J. Chen: A multi-layered, multi-dimensional representation of digital educational resources; Riesthuis, G.J.A.: Information languages and multilingual subject access; Geisselmann, F.: Access methods in a database of e-journals; Beghtol, C.: The Iter Bibliography: International standard subject access to medieval and renaissance materials (400-1700); Slavic, A.: General library classification in learning material metadata: the application in IMS/LOM and CDMES metadata schemas; Cordeiro, M.I.: From library authority control to network authoritative metadata sources; Koch, T., H. Neuroth u. M. Day: Renardus: Cross-browsing European subject gateways via a common classification system (DDC); Olson, H.A., D.B. Ward: Mundane standards, everyday technologies, equitable access; Burke, M.A.: Personal Construct Theory as a research tool in Library and Information Science: case study: development of a user-driven classification of photographs

Footnote

Rez. in: KO 31(2004) no.2, S.117-118 (D. Campbell): "This excellent volume offers 22 papers delivered at an IFLA Satellite meeting in Dublin Ohio in 2001. The conference gathered together information and computer scientists to discuss an important and difficult question: in what specific ways can the accumulated skills, theories and traditions of librarianship be mobilized to face the challenges of providing subject access to information in present and future networked information environments? The papers which grapple with this question are organized in a surprisingly deft and coherent way. Many conferences and proceedings have unhappy sessions that contain a hodge-podge of papers that didn't quite fit any other categories. As befits a good classificationist, editor I.C. McIlwaine has kept this problem to a minimum. The papers are organized into eight sessions, which split into two broad categories. The first five sessions deal with subject domains, and the last three deal with subject access tools. The five sessions and thirteen papers that discuss access in different domains appear in order of in creasing intension. The first papers deal with access in multilingual environments, followed by papers an access across multiple vocabularies and across sectors, ending up with studies of domain-specific retrieval (primarily education). Some of the papers offer predictably strong work by scholars engaged in ongoing, long-term research. Gerard Riesthuis offers a clear analysis of the complexities of negotiating non-identical thesauri, particularly in cases where hierarchical structure varies across different languages. Hope Olson and Dennis Ward use Olson's familiar and welcome method of using provocative and unconventional theory to generate meliorative approaches to blas in general subject access schemes. Many papers, an the other hand, deal with specific ongoing projects: Renardus, The High Level Thesaurus Project, The Colorado Digitization Project and The Iter Bibliography for medieval and Renaissance material. Most of these papers display a similar structure: an explanation of the theory and purpose of the project, an account of problems encountered in the implementation, and a discussion of the results, both promising and disappointing, thus far. Of these papers, the account of the Multilanguage Access to Subjects Project in Europe (MACS) deserves special mention. In describing how the project is founded an the principle of the equality of languages, with each subject heading language maintained in its own database, and with no single language used as a pivot for the others, Elisabeth Freyre and Max Naudi offer a particularly vivid example of the way the ethics of librarianship translate into pragmatic contexts and concrete procedures. The three sessions and nine papers devoted to subject access tools split into two kinds: papers that discuss the use of theory and research to generate new tools for a networked environment, and those that discuss the transformation of traditional subject access tools in this environment. In the new tool development area, Mary Burke provides a promising example of the bidirectional approach that is so often necessary: in her case study of user-driven classification of photographs, she user personal construct theory to clarify the practice of classification, while at the same time using practice to test the theory. Carol Bean and Rebecca Green offer an intriguing combination of librarianship and computer science, importing frame representation technique from artificial intelligence to standardize syntagmatic relationships to enhance recall and precision.
The papers discussing the transformation of traditional tools locate the point of transformation in different places. Some, like the papers an DDC, LCC and UDC, suggest that these schemes can be imported into the networked environment and used as a basis for improving access to networked resources, just as they improve access to physical resources. While many of these papers are intriguing, I suspect that convincing those outside the profession will be difficult. In particular, Edward O'Neill and his colleagues, while offering a fascinating suggestion for preserving the Library of Congress Subject Headings and their associated infrastructure by converting them into a faceted scheme, will have an uphill battle convincing the unconverted that LCSH has a place in the online networked environment. Two papers deserve mention for taking a different approach: both Francis Devadason and Maria Ines Cordeiro suggest that we import concepts and techniques rather than realized schemes. Devadason argues for the creation of a faceted pre-coordinate indexing scheme for Internet resources based an Deep Structure indexing, which originates in Bhattacharyya's Postulate-Based Permuted Subject Indexing and in Ranganathan's chain indexing techniques. Cordeiro takes up the vitally important role of authority control in Web environments, suggesting that the techniques of authority control be expanded to enhance user flexibility. By focusing her argument an the concepts rather than an the existing tools, and by making useful and important distinctions between library and non-library uses of authority control, Cordeiro suggests that librarianship's contribution to networked access has less to do with its tools and infrastructure, and more to do with concepts that need to be boldly reinvented. The excellence of this collection derives in part from the energy, insight and diversity of the papers. Credit also goes to the planning and forethought that went into the conference itself by OCLC, the IFLA Classification and Indexing Section, the IFLA Information Technology Section, and the Program Committee, headed by editor I.C. McIlwaine. This collection avoids many of the problems of conference proceedings, and instead offers the best of such proceedings: detail, diversity, and judicious mixtures of theory and practice. Some of the disadvantages that plague conference proceedings appear here. Busy scholars sometimes interpret the concept of "camera-ready copy" creatively, offering diagrams that could have used some streamlining, and label boxes that cut off the tops or bottoms of letters. The papers are necessarily short, and many of them raise issues that deserve more extensive treatment. The issue of subject access in networked environments is crying out for further synthesis at the conceptual and theoretical level. But no synthesis can afford to ignore the kind of energetic, imaginative and important work that the papers in these proceedings represent."

0.017339872 = product of:
  0.034679744 = sum of:
    0.034679744 = product of:
      0.06935949 = sum of:
        0.06935949 = weight(_text_:web in 4980) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06935949 = score(doc=4980,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052098576 = queryNorm
            0.4079388 = fieldWeight in 4980, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4980)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Integration der Navigation und Suche in lizenzierten Journalen und gleichzeitig in freien digitalen Dokumenten unter einer einheitlichen konsistenten Nutzeroberflache ist eines der ungelösten F&E-Probleme der Fachinformation. Hierbei müssen Elemente des Invisible Web und des Visible Web unter Berücksichtigung offener Standards nahtlos miteinander verbunden werden. Der Artikel beschreibt Ausgangspunkt und Entwicklungsgeschichte eines kooperativen Vorhabens "Verteilter Zeitschriftenserver", das sich auf dem Wege über eine Generalisierung zum "Verteilten Dokumentenserver" zur Basis der Kooperation von vascoda und AGVerbund mit dem Ziel der Realisierung einer Offenen Digitalen Bibliothek der Wissenschaften entwickelte.

0.014117276 = product of:
  0.028234553 = sum of:
    0.028234553 = product of:
      0.056469105 = sum of:
        0.056469105 = weight(_text_:22 in 3173) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056469105 = score(doc=3173,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18244034 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052098576 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3173, 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=3173)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Argus. 26(1997) no.3, S.16-22

0.014117276 = product of:
  0.028234553 = sum of:
    0.028234553 = product of:
      0.056469105 = sum of:
        0.056469105 = weight(_text_:22 in 127) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056469105 = score(doc=127,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18244034 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052098576 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 127, 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=127)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Program. 30(1996) no.1, S.1-22

0.014117276 = product of:
  0.028234553 = sum of:
    0.028234553 = product of:
      0.056469105 = sum of:
        0.056469105 = weight(_text_:22 in 2588) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056469105 = score(doc=2588,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18244034 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052098576 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2588, 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=2588)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Select newsletter. 1998, no.22, Spring, S.5-6

0.014117276 = product of:
  0.028234553 = sum of:
    0.028234553 = product of:
      0.056469105 = sum of:
        0.056469105 = weight(_text_:22 in 3193) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056469105 = score(doc=3193,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18244034 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052098576 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3193, 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=3193)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

3. 3.1999 17:22:57

0.014117276 = product of:
  0.028234553 = sum of:
    0.028234553 = product of:
      0.056469105 = sum of:
        0.056469105 = weight(_text_:22 in 5286) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056469105 = score(doc=5286,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18244034 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052098576 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5286, 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=5286)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

8.10.2000 14:47:22

0.012261141 = product of:
  0.024522282 = sum of:
    0.024522282 = product of:
      0.049044564 = sum of:
        0.049044564 = weight(_text_:web in 3190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.049044564 = score(doc=3190,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052098576 = queryNorm
            0.2884563 = fieldWeight in 3190, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3190)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Vor 20 Jahren, genau gesagt am 26. Juli 1996, erblickte die Literatursuchmaschine "KVK" das Licht der Internet-Welt. Seit damals wurden mehrere Milliarden Suchanfragen von Karlsruhe aus an andere Web-Kataloge von Bibliotheken und Verbünden geschickt, Trefferlisten ausgewertet und den Nutzern in einheitlicher Form präsentiert. Dieser Beitrag erklärt, warum der KVK entwickelt wurde und warum es diesen "Internet-Dino" auch heute noch gibt und beschreibt den aktuellen Stand.

0.010728499 = product of:
  0.021456998 = sum of:
    0.021456998 = product of:
      0.042913996 = sum of:
        0.042913996 = weight(_text_:web in 3194) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042913996 = score(doc=3194,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052098576 = queryNorm
            0.25239927 = fieldWeight in 3194, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3194)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The State Library of Iowa, USA, received a Higher Education Act title II grant from the US Dept. of Education in 1994 to create a demonstration project of new library information technologies. Describes 2 interlinked components of the project: Web-based union catalogue development and statewide deployment of the ANSI/NISO Z39.50 standard for database search and retrieval. Z39.50 was chosen because of its ability to searching multiple remote databases in a single session and its common interface across a variety of implementations. Use of a distributed Z39.50 search makes the need for maintaining large union catalogues unnecessary

0.010728499 = product of:
  0.021456998 = sum of:
    0.021456998 = product of:
      0.042913996 = sum of:
        0.042913996 = weight(_text_:web in 2290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042913996 = score(doc=2290,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052098576 = queryNorm
            0.25239927 = fieldWeight in 2290, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2290)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.01061846 = product of:
  0.02123692 = sum of:
    0.02123692 = product of:
      0.04247384 = sum of:
        0.04247384 = weight(_text_:web in 1217) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04247384 = score(doc=1217,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.17002425 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052098576 = queryNorm
            0.24981049 = fieldWeight in 1217, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1217)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The National Science Foundation's (NSF) National Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology Education Digital Library (NSDL) program seeks to create, develop, and sustain a national digital library supporting science, mathematics, engineering, and technology (SMET) education at all levels -- preK-12, undergraduate, graduate, and life-long learning. The resulting virtual institution is expected to catalyze and support continual improvements in the quality of science, mathematics, engineering, and technology (SMET) education in both formal and informal settings. The vision for this program has been explored through a series of workshops over the past several years and documented in accompanying reports and monographs. (See [1-7, 10, 12, and 13].) These efforts have led to a characterization of the digital library as a learning environments and resources network for science, mathematics, engineering, and technology education, that is: * designed to meet the needs of learners, in both individual and collaborative settings; * constructed to enable dynamic use of a broad array of materials for learning primarily in digital format; and * managed actively to promote reliable anytime, anywhere access to quality collections and services, available both within and without the network. Underlying the NSDL program are several working assumptions. First, while there is currently no lack of "great piles of content" on the Web, there is an urgent need for "piles of great content". The difficulties in discovering and verifying the authority of appropriate Web-based material are certainly well known, yet there are many examples of learning resources of great promise available (particularly those exploiting the power of multiple media), with more added every day. The breadth and interconnectedness of the Web are simultaneously a great strength and shortcoming. Second, the "unit" or granularity of educational content can and will shrink, affording the opportunity for users to become creators and vice versa, as learning objects are reused, repackaged, and repurposed. To be sure, this scenario cannot take place without serious attention to intellectual property and digital rights management concerns. But new models and technologies are being explored (see a number of recent articles in the January issue of D-Lib Magazine). Third, there is a need for an "organizational infrastructure" that facilitates connections between distributed users and distributed content, as alluded to in the third bullet above. Finally, while much of the ongoing use of the library is envisioned to be "free" in the sense of the public good, there is an opportunity and a need to consider multiple alternative models of sustainability, particularly in the area of services offered by the digital library. More details about the NSDL program including information about proposal deadlines and current awards may be found at <http://www.ehr.nsf.gov/ehr/due/programs/nsdl>.

0.010587957 = product of:
  0.021175914 = sum of:
    0.021175914 = product of:
      0.042351827 = sum of:
        0.042351827 = weight(_text_:22 in 5589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042351827 = score(doc=5589,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18244034 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052098576 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5589, 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=5589)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 6.2002 19:32:15