Document (#18891)

Author

Merwe, H.C.J. van der

Title

SAMARC versus USMARC and UNIMARC : a position paper

Source

Mousaion. 15(1997) no.2, S.84-109

Year

1997

Abstract

The original purpose of the MARC format was to specify the formatting of data to be exchanged electronically. Compares the SAMARC format with USMARC and UNIMARC, both well established and widely used in the International community, in terms of scope, updating mechanisms, completeness and the current status of the formats. Recommends conversion to USMARC given the fact that SAMARC is hampered by an inadequate infrastructure which makes it unresponsive to immediate needs and the UNIMARC is still being developed. Discusses the benefits and the negative aspects of converting to USMARC

Theme

Datenformate

Object

SAMARC
USMARC
UNIMARC

Similar documents (content)

1. Campos, F.M.; Lopes, M.I.; Galvao, R.M.: MARC formats and their use : an overview (1995) 0.12

   0.11634502 = sum of:
     0.11634502 = product of:
       0.7271564 = sum of:
         0.065592155 = weight(abstract_txt:conversion in 3338) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
           0.065592155 = score(doc=3338,freq=1.0), product of:
             0.11186395 = queryWeight, product of:
               1.1107644 = boost
               6.2544694 = idf(docFreq=230, maxDocs=44218)
               0.016101923 = queryNorm
             0.5863565 = fieldWeight in 3338, product of:
               1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of:
                 1.0 = termFreq=1.0
               6.2544694 = idf(docFreq=230, maxDocs=44218)
               0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3338)
         0.110781714 = weight(abstract_txt:converting in 3338) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
           0.110781714 = score(doc=3338,freq=1.0), product of:
             0.15864788 = queryWeight, product of:
               1.3227994 = boost
               7.448392 = idf(docFreq=69, maxDocs=44218)
               0.016101923 = queryNorm
             0.6982868 = fieldWeight in 3338, product of:
               1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of:
                 1.0 = termFreq=1.0
               7.448392 = idf(docFreq=69, maxDocs=44218)
               0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3338)
         0.12277913 = weight(abstract_txt:format in 3338) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
           0.12277913 = score(doc=3338,freq=3.0), product of:
             0.14842539 = queryWeight, product of:
               1.8094474 = boost
               5.0942993 = idf(docFreq=736, maxDocs=44218)
               0.016101923 = queryNorm
             0.82721114 = fieldWeight in 3338, product of:
               1.7320508 = tf(freq=3.0), with freq of:
                 3.0 = termFreq=3.0
               5.0942993 = idf(docFreq=736, maxDocs=44218)
               0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3338)
         0.4280034 = weight(abstract_txt:unimarc in 3338) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
           0.4280034 = score(doc=3338,freq=2.0), product of:
             0.4471475 = queryWeight, product of:
               3.846475 = boost
               7.2195506 = idf(docFreq=87, maxDocs=44218)
               0.016101923 = queryNorm
             0.9571862 = fieldWeight in 3338, product of:
               1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                 2.0 = termFreq=2.0
               7.2195506 = idf(docFreq=87, maxDocs=44218)
               0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3338)
       0.16 = coord(4/25)
   

2. McKercher, B.; Chang, P.X.: ¬A comparison of USMARC and UNIMARC for system design (1995) 0.11

   0.11085791 = sum of:
     0.11085791 = product of:
       0.92381597 = sum of:
         0.07088656 = weight(abstract_txt:format in 2627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
           0.07088656 = score(doc=2627,freq=1.0), product of:
             0.14842539 = queryWeight, product of:
               1.8094474 = boost
               5.0942993 = idf(docFreq=736, maxDocs=44218)
               0.016101923 = queryNorm
             0.47759056 = fieldWeight in 2627, product of:
               1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of:
                 1.0 = termFreq=1.0
               5.0942993 = idf(docFreq=736, maxDocs=44218)
               0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2627)
         0.3026441 = weight(abstract_txt:unimarc in 2627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
           0.3026441 = score(doc=2627,freq=1.0), product of:
             0.4471475 = queryWeight, product of:
               3.846475 = boost
               7.2195506 = idf(docFreq=87, maxDocs=44218)
               0.016101923 = queryNorm
             0.67683285 = fieldWeight in 2627, product of:
               1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of:
                 1.0 = termFreq=1.0
               7.2195506 = idf(docFreq=87, maxDocs=44218)
               0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2627)
         0.5502853 = weight(abstract_txt:usmarc in 2627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
           0.5502853 = score(doc=2627,freq=2.0), product of:
             0.5819122 = queryWeight, product of:
               5.0668216 = boost
               7.132539 = idf(docFreq=95, maxDocs=44218)
               0.016101923 = queryNorm
             0.94565 = fieldWeight in 2627, product of:
               1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                 2.0 = termFreq=2.0
               7.132539 = idf(docFreq=95, maxDocs=44218)
               0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2627)
       0.12 = coord(3/25)
   

3. SiBiL: Système intégré pour les bibliothèques universitaires de Lausanne : 9 années d'automatisation à la Bibliothèque cantonale et universitaire (1980) 0.11

   0.11085791 = sum of:
     0.11085791 = product of:
       0.92381597 = sum of:
         0.07088656 = weight(abstract_txt:format in 4294) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
           0.07088656 = score(doc=4294,freq=1.0), product of:
             0.14842539 = queryWeight, product of:
               1.8094474 = boost
               5.0942993 = idf(docFreq=736, maxDocs=44218)
               0.016101923 = queryNorm
             0.47759056 = fieldWeight in 4294, product of:
               1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of:
                 1.0 = termFreq=1.0
               5.0942993 = idf(docFreq=736, maxDocs=44218)
               0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4294)
         0.3026441 = weight(abstract_txt:unimarc in 4294) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
           0.3026441 = score(doc=4294,freq=1.0), product of:
             0.4471475 = queryWeight, product of:
               3.846475 = boost
               7.2195506 = idf(docFreq=87, maxDocs=44218)
               0.016101923 = queryNorm
             0.67683285 = fieldWeight in 4294, product of:
               1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of:
                 1.0 = termFreq=1.0
               7.2195506 = idf(docFreq=87, maxDocs=44218)
               0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4294)
         0.5502853 = weight(abstract_txt:usmarc in 4294) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
           0.5502853 = score(doc=4294,freq=2.0), product of:
             0.5819122 = queryWeight, product of:
               5.0668216 = boost
               7.132539 = idf(docFreq=95, maxDocs=44218)
               0.016101923 = queryNorm
             0.94565 = fieldWeight in 4294, product of:
               1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                 2.0 = termFreq=2.0
               7.132539 = idf(docFreq=95, maxDocs=44218)
               0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4294)
       0.12 = coord(3/25)
   

4. Mao, C.-C.: ¬The compatibility of CMARC (1998) 0.10

   0.10435079 = sum of:
     0.10435079 = product of:
       1.304385 = sum of:
         0.57067126 = weight(abstract_txt:unimarc in 4621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
           0.57067126 = score(doc=4621,freq=2.0), product of:
             0.4471475 = queryWeight, product of:
               3.846475 = boost
               7.2195506 = idf(docFreq=87, maxDocs=44218)
               0.016101923 = queryNorm
             1.2762483 = fieldWeight in 4621, product of:
               1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                 2.0 = termFreq=2.0
               7.2195506 = idf(docFreq=87, maxDocs=44218)
               0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4621)
         0.7337137 = weight(abstract_txt:usmarc in 4621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
           0.7337137 = score(doc=4621,freq=2.0), product of:
             0.5819122 = queryWeight, product of:
               5.0668216 = boost
               7.132539 = idf(docFreq=95, maxDocs=44218)
               0.016101923 = queryNorm
             1.2608666 = fieldWeight in 4621, product of:
               1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                 2.0 = termFreq=2.0
               7.132539 = idf(docFreq=95, maxDocs=44218)
               0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4621)
       0.08 = coord(2/25)
   

5. USMARC specifications for record structure, character sets, tapes (1990) 0.10

   0.09938749 = sum of:
     0.09938749 = product of:
       1.2423437 = sum of:
         0.14177312 = weight(abstract_txt:format in 8042) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
           0.14177312 = score(doc=8042,freq=1.0), product of:
             0.14842539 = queryWeight, product of:
               1.8094474 = boost
               5.0942993 = idf(docFreq=736, maxDocs=44218)
               0.016101923 = queryNorm
             0.9551811 = fieldWeight in 8042, product of:
               1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of:
                 1.0 = termFreq=1.0
               5.0942993 = idf(docFreq=736, maxDocs=44218)
               0.1875 = fieldNorm(doc=8042)
         1.1005706 = weight(abstract_txt:usmarc in 8042) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
           1.1005706 = score(doc=8042,freq=2.0), product of:
             0.5819122 = queryWeight, product of:
               5.0668216 = boost
               7.132539 = idf(docFreq=95, maxDocs=44218)
               0.016101923 = queryNorm
             1.8913 = fieldWeight in 8042, product of:
               1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                 2.0 = termFreq=2.0
               7.132539 = idf(docFreq=95, maxDocs=44218)
               0.1875 = fieldNorm(doc=8042)
       0.08 = coord(2/25)