Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Zumer, M."
  • × theme_ss:"Formalerschließung"
  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. O'Neill, E.; Zumer, M.; Mixter, J.: FRBR aggregates : their types and frequency in library collections (2015) 0.06 
    0.058720212 = product of:
  0.117440425 = sum of:
    0.117440425 = sum of:
      0.07536644 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 2610) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07536644 = score(doc=2610,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.36948 = fieldWeight in 2610, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2610)
      0.042073987 = weight(_text_:22 in 2610) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042073987 = score(doc=2610,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2610, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2610)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Aggregates have been a frequent topic of discussion between library science researchers. This study seeks to better understand aggregates through the analysis of a sample of bibliographic records and review of the cataloging treatment of aggregates. The study focuses on determining how common aggregates are in library collections, what types of aggregates exist, how aggregates are described in bibliographic records, and the criteria for identifying aggregates from the information in bibliographic records. A sample of bibliographic records representing textual resources was taken from OCLC's WorldCat database. More than 20 percent of the sampled records represented aggregates and more works were embodied in aggregates than were embodied in single work manifestations. A variety of issues, including cataloging practices and the varying definitions of aggregates, made it difficult to accurately identify and quantify the presence of aggregates using only the information from bibliographic records.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  2. Budanovic, M.P.; Zumer, M.: ¬The catalogers' thought process : a comparison of formal and informal context (2018) 0.03 
    0.03108707 = product of:
  0.06217414 = sum of:
    0.06217414 = product of:
      0.12434828 = sum of:
        0.12434828 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 5180) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12434828 = score(doc=5180,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051756795 = queryNorm
            0.6096109 = fieldWeight in 5180, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5180)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The aim of this article is to analyze how catalogers describe publications without cataloging tools in comparison with the current cataloging process. A total of 46 catalogers took part in the first study, a free description of monographic publications, while 30 catalogers performed original cataloging in their actual environment. A combination of observations and think-aloud protocols was used for data gathering in both studies. The focus was on Slovenian catalogers from different types and sizes of libraries. Results revealed both differences and similarities between catalogers' mental models in the respective studies.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 56(2018) no.5/6, S.507-529
  3. Harej, V.; Zumer, M.: Analysis of FRBR user tasks (2013) 0.02 
    0.01776404 = product of:
  0.03552808 = sum of:
    0.03552808 = product of:
      0.07105616 = sum of:
        0.07105616 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 1955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07105616 = score(doc=1955,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051756795 = queryNorm
            0.3483491 = fieldWeight in 1955, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1955)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 51(2013) no.7, S.741-759
  4. Zumer, M.; O'Neill, E.T.: Modeling aggregates in FRBR (2012) 0.01 
    0.0133230295 = product of:
  0.026646059 = sum of:
    0.026646059 = product of:
      0.053292118 = sum of:
        0.053292118 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 1913) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.053292118 = score(doc=1913,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051756795 = queryNorm
            0.26126182 = fieldWeight in 1913, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1913)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 50(2012) no.5/7, S.456-472
  5. Doerr, M.; Riva, P.; Zumer, M.: FRBR entities : identity and identification (2012) 0.01 
    0.00888202 = product of:
  0.01776404 = sum of:
    0.01776404 = product of:
      0.03552808 = sum of:
        0.03552808 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 1917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03552808 = score(doc=1917,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051756795 = queryNorm
            0.17417455 = fieldWeight in 1917, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1917)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 50(2012) no.5/7, S.517-541

Authors