Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

0.006721379 = product of:
  0.020164136 = sum of:
    0.020164136 = weight(_text_:to in 5657) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020164136 = score(doc=5657,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.24353972 = fieldWeight in 5657, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5657)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This article addresses some unresolved cataloging issue related to pinyin Romanization, vernacular application, field coding, and other aspects of Chinese cataloging in OCLC. These issues lead to inconsistencies in the way Chinese materials are cataloged, though cataloging standards and Romanization rules are made and the processes of the projects like Pinyin Conversion, Manual Review, and Pinyin Clean-Up have been completed. In this article, eight of the most commonly encountered issues and inconsistent practices in Chinese cataloging are discussed. Examples from Chinese records created with OCLC CJK software in WorldCat are used to demonstrate the problems they raise. With the discussion it is hoped that these inconsistent practices can be recognized and avoided in the future.

0.0039199875 = product of:
  0.011759962 = sum of:
    0.011759962 = weight(_text_:to in 1884) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011759962 = score(doc=1884,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.14203523 = fieldWeight in 1884, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1884)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

In this article, the authors report a series of evaluations of two metadata schemes developed for Moving Image Collections (MIC), an integrated online catalog of moving images. Through two online surveys and one experiment spanning various stages of metadata implementation, the MIC evaluation team explored a user-centered approach in which the four generic user tasks suggested by IFLA FRBR (International Association of Library Associations Functional Requirement for Bibliographic Records) were embedded in data collection and analyses. Diverse groups of users rated usefulness of individual metadata fields for finding, identifying, selecting, and obtaining moving images. The results demonstrate a consistency across these evaluations with respect to (a) identification of a set of useful metadata fields highly rated by target users for each of the FRBR generic tasks, and (b) indication of a significant interaction between MIC metadata fields and the FRBR generic tasks. The findings provide timely feedback for the MIC implementation specifically, and valuable suggestions to other similar metadata application settings in general. They also suggest the feasibility of using the four IFLA FRBR generic tasks as a framework for user-centered functional metadata evaluations.