Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Banerjee, K."
  1. Banerjee, K.: Taking advantage of outsourcing options : using purchased record sets to maximize cataloging effectiveness (2001) 0.00
    0.0020506454 = product of:
      0.004101291 = sum of:
        0.004101291 = product of:
          0.008202582 = sum of:
            0.008202582 = weight(_text_:a in 5424) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.008202582 = score(doc=5424,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.1544581 = fieldWeight in 5424, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5424)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Libraries have downloaded records created by other institutions from bibliographic utilities for many years, but purchasing record sets is often a controversial topic in technical services. However, as fewer staff are expected to manage a rapidly growing number of increasingly complex information resources, technical services departments are called upon to identify their core competencies and delegate operations that fall outside those areas to others. This paper examines the costs and benefits associated with the purchase and loading of record sets. It also establishes criteria for determining when record sets should be considered as an alternative to traditional cataloging.
    Type
    a
  2. Banerjee, K.: Describing electronic documents in the online catalog : current issues (1997) 0.00
    0.0020296127 = product of:
      0.0040592253 = sum of:
        0.0040592253 = product of:
          0.008118451 = sum of:
            0.008118451 = weight(_text_:a in 1439) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.008118451 = score(doc=1439,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 1439, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1439)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The relationship between library catalogues and electronic resources differs from that between catalogues and physical materials, particularly with regard to cataloguing rules, which were originally designed to help users of card catalogues to find physical works on library shelves. However, these rules apply awkwardly to electronic resources because functionally different electronic works raise special cataloguinf issues. Discusses the problems of describing remote electronic resources in online catalogues with particular reference to the InterCat project: a nationwide experiment to create a database of Internet resources in MARC format, containing description, location and access information (including PURLs = Persitent URLs)). Concludes that descriptive information helps the user identify the works needed, but that it is practical to provide only minimal desriptive information for remote electronic resources in the catalogue record. To a limited extent, the access lost from reduced description can be replaced with new cataloguing techniques designed to stabilize the catalogue record
    Type
    a
  3. Banerjee, K.; Johnson, M.: Improving access to archival collections with automated entity extraction (2015) 0.00
    0.0020296127 = product of:
      0.0040592253 = sum of:
        0.0040592253 = product of:
          0.008118451 = sum of:
            0.008118451 = weight(_text_:a in 2144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.008118451 = score(doc=2144,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 2144, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2144)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The complexity and diversity of archival resources make constructing rich metadata records time consuming and expensive, which in turn limits access to these valuable materials. However, significant automation of the metadata creation process would dramatically reduce the cost of providing access points, improve access to individual resources, and establish connections between resources that would otherwise remain unknown. Using a case study at Oregon Health & Science University as a lens to examine the conceptual and technical challenges associated with automated extraction of access points, we discuss using publically accessible API's to extract entities (i.e. people, places, concepts, etc.) from digital and digitized objects. We describe why Linked Open Data is not well suited for a use case such as ours. We conclude with recommendations about how this method can be used in archives as well as for other library applications.
    Type
    a