2016
DOI: 10.1080/07317131.2016.1169861
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Metadata standards and web services in libraries, archives, and museums: An active learning resource

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

2
0
0

Year Published

2024
2024
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
1
1

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
2
0
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The results presented in Figure 6 show that both groups prioritized "event description," with a total importance score of 12.38%. The prioritization of "event topic" and "event type," with a combined importance of 12.11%, each indicates a common understanding of their importance in the academic landscape, which supports Rowell's (2016) findings on the standardization of academic metadata.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 75%
“…The results presented in Figure 6 show that both groups prioritized "event description," with a total importance score of 12.38%. The prioritization of "event topic" and "event type," with a combined importance of 12.11%, each indicates a common understanding of their importance in the academic landscape, which supports Rowell's (2016) findings on the standardization of academic metadata.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 75%
“…The results presented in Figure 6 show that both groups prioritized "event description," with a total importance score of 12.38%. The prioritization of "event topic" and "event type," with a combined importance of 12.11%, each indicates a common understanding of their importance in the academic landscape, which supports Rowell's (2016) findings on the standardization of academic metadata. Figure 7, a heat map based on chi-square values, shows significant differences in the weights that organizers and scholars give to different factors when evaluating academic activities.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 75%