Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

0.044187494 = product of:
  0.08837499 = sum of:
    0.08837499 = product of:
      0.17674997 = sum of:
        0.17674997 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 706) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.17674997 = score(doc=706,freq=22.0), product of:
            0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051756795 = queryNorm
            0.8665075 = fieldWeight in 706, product of:
              4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
                22.0 = termFreq=22.0
              3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=706)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Descriptive cataloging is the process of representing resources by recording their identifying traits and selecting specific names and titles to serve as access points. It is a key component of the larger cataloging process alongside subject cataloging, authority work, and encoding. Descriptive cataloging practices have existed for centuries and, over time, have become standardized through the use of cataloging codes. These documents guide this process by prescribing a consistent set of elements, providing directions on how to record these elements, and offering instructions on how to select and format access points. The goal of descriptive cataloging is not to create perfect representations but to provide data to serve users. The international cataloging standard Resource Description and Access (RDA) is now bringing more institutions under the same set of descriptive practices than ever before. This, along with recent technological developments, promises increased sharing and reuse of descriptive cataloging data.

Content

Vgl.: https://doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2020.1864693. Teil eines Themenheftes: Cataloging and Classification: Back to Basics.

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 59(2021) no.2/3, S.225-241

0.02220505 = product of:
  0.0444101 = sum of:
    0.0444101 = product of:
      0.0888202 = sum of:
        0.0888202 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 5464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0888202 = score(doc=5464,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051756795 = queryNorm
            0.43543637 = fieldWeight in 5464, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5464)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose Library work is increasingly being explored from the perspective of design. Still, little work has actively explored specific aspects of design as they relate to library cataloging. The purpose of this paper is to dive deeper into the relationship between library cataloging and design by exploring a specific aspect of design - the concept of repertoire, or the use of previous experiences and bodies of knowledge during current work. Design/methodology/approach To examine catalogers' use of repertoire, this paper employed a juxtaposition of field observations of professional library catalogers' work processes with elements of "think-aloud" protocols. Findings The researchers identified three major types of repertory knowledge that were demonstrated by catalogers: internally embedded repertory knowledge; externally embedded repertory knowledge; and seeking out new knowledge using other sources. Additionally, certain trends were noted concerning which repertory knowledge was utilized for which particular task. Determining subject and genre headings were noted for relying quite extensively on internal repertoire such as personal knowledge and institutional knowledge, along with external sources, such as personal notes and local examples. Originality/value This paper adds to a growing body of work calling for design approaches in libraries and related information settings, and breaks ground by applying the previously unexplored concept of repertoire to librarianship, specifically library cataloging, which offers a new perspective on cataloger's judgement.

0.015543535 = product of:
  0.03108707 = sum of:
    0.03108707 = product of:
      0.06217414 = sum of:
        0.06217414 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 1141) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06217414 = score(doc=1141,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051756795 = queryNorm
            0.30480546 = fieldWeight in 1141, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1141)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 60(2022) no.6-7, p.490-513