PropertyValue
?:about
?:abstract
  • When discussing standardization and secondary analysis in computer driven historical research, we should clearly distinguish between different approaches towards the usage of computers. The properties of four of them – statistical analysis, structured data bases, full text systems and annotation systems – are discussed and compared in some detail. Standards which want to convince users, that they should follow just one of these approaches will not succeed. What we need is a discussion of the communalities between the underlying information models and the identification of properties, for which clear conceptual models can be devised. Such clear conceptual models are a prerequisite for technical solutions, which ultimately can enable the exchange of data across the different approaches. Such conceptual models, therefore, are what we need as standards. (xsd:string)
?:contributor
?:dateModified
  • 2017 (xsd:gyear)
?:datePublished
  • 2017 (xsd:gyear)
?:doi
  • 10.12759/hsr.suppl.29.2017.203-220 ()
?:duplicate
?:hasFulltext
  • true (xsd:boolean)
is ?:hasPart of
?:inLanguage
  • en (xsd:string)
?:isPartOf
?:issn
  • 0936-6784 ()
?:issueNumber
  • 29 (xsd:string)
?:linksDOI
?:linksURN
is ?:mainEntity of
?:name
  • The Need for Standards: Data Modelling and Exchange [1991] (xsd:string)
?:provider
?:publicationType
  • Zeitschriftenartikel (xsd:string)
  • journal_article (en)
?:sourceInfo
  • GESIS-SSOAR (xsd:string)
  • In: Historical Social Research, Supplement, 2017, 29, 203-220 (xsd:string)
rdf:type
?:url
?:urn
  • urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-54042-9 ()