Search (55 results, page 2 of 3)

  • × author_ss:"Zumer, M."
  1. Zumer, M.: User interfaces of national bibliographies on CD-ROM : results of a survey (2000) 0.01 
    0.009384644 = product of:
  0.037538577 = sum of:
    0.022089208 = weight(_text_:of in 4896) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022089208 = score(doc=4896,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.34207192 = fieldWeight in 4896, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4896)
    0.01544937 = product of:
      0.03089874 = sum of:
        0.03089874 = weight(_text_:on in 4896) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03089874 = score(doc=4896,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.34020463 = fieldWeight in 4896, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4896)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
  2. Pisanski, J.; Zumer, M.: Mental models of the bibliographic universe : part 2: comparison task and conclusions (2010) 0.01 
    0.008782854 = product of:
  0.035131417 = sum of:
    0.027328307 = weight(_text_:of in 4146) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027328307 = score(doc=4146,freq=48.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.42320424 = fieldWeight in 4146, product of:
          6.928203 = tf(freq=48.0), with freq of:
            48.0 = termFreq=48.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4146)
    0.007803111 = product of:
      0.015606222 = sum of:
        0.015606222 = weight(_text_:on in 4146) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015606222 = score(doc=4146,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 4146, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4146)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    Purpose - The paper aims to provide some insight into mental models of the bibliographic universe and how they compare with functional requirements for bibliographic records (FRBR) as a conceptual model of the bibliographic universe. Design/methodology/approach - To get a more complete picture of the mental models, different elicitation techniques were used. The three tasks of the paper were: card-sorting, concept mapping and comparison task. The paper deals with comparison task, which consisted of interviews and rankings, and provides a discussion of the results of the paper as a whole. Findings - Results of the ranking part of the comparison task confirm the findings of concept mapping task. In both cases, while there are individual differences between mental models, on average they gravitate towards FRBR. Research limitations/implications - This is a small study and it provides only a glimpse of the implications of using FRBR as a conceptual basis for cataloguing. More FRBR-related user studies are needed, including similar studies on different groups of individuals and different types of materials, as well as practical studies of user needs and user interfaces. Practical implications - The results of this study are the first user-tested indication of the validity of FRBR as a conceptual basis for the future of cataloguing. Originality/value - This is the first published paper of mental models of the bibliographic universe and uses a unique combination of mental model elicitation techniques.
    Source
    Journal of documentation. 66(2010) no.5, S.668-680
  3. Pisanski, J.; Zumer, M.: User verification of the FRBR conceptual model (2012) 0.01 
    0.007700827 = product of:
  0.030803308 = sum of:
    0.023000197 = weight(_text_:of in 395) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023000197 = score(doc=395,freq=34.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.35617945 = fieldWeight in 395, product of:
          5.8309517 = tf(freq=34.0), with freq of:
            34.0 = termFreq=34.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=395)
    0.007803111 = product of:
      0.015606222 = sum of:
        0.015606222 = weight(_text_:on in 395) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015606222 = score(doc=395,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 395, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=395)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    Purpose - This paper aims to build on of a previous study of mental models of the bibliographic universe, which found that the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) conceptual model is intuitive. Design/methodology/approach - A total of 120 participants were presented with a list of bibliographic entities and six graphs each. They were asked to choose the graph they thought best represented the relationships between entities described. Findings - The graph based on the FRBR model was chosen by more than half of the participants and none of the alternatives stood out. This gives further indication that FRBR is an appropriate model of the bibliographic universe from users' standpoint. Research limitations/implications - The study only looked at the textual part of the bibliographic universe. Further research is needed for other types of materials. Practical implications - This research suggests that there should be a more positive attitude towards implementation of FRBR-based catalogues. Originality/value - This is one of only a handful of user studies relating to FRBR, which looks to be the backbone of catalogues for years to come. As such, the results should be of interest to everybody involved with catalogues, from cataloguers to the end-users.
    Source
    Journal of documentation. 68(2012) no.4, S.582-592
  4. Pauman Budanovi, M.; Zumer, M.: Investigating mental models of cataloguers as the first step towards the development of intuitive cataloguer's tools (2015) 0.01 
    0.0075898245 = product of:
  0.030359298 = sum of:
    0.019324033 = weight(_text_:of in 2988) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019324033 = score(doc=2988,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.2992506 = fieldWeight in 2988, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2988)
    0.0110352645 = product of:
      0.022070529 = sum of:
        0.022070529 = weight(_text_:on in 2988) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022070529 = score(doc=2988,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.24300331 = fieldWeight in 2988, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2988)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Source
    Re:inventing information science in the networked society: Proceedings of the 14th International Symposium on Information Science, Zadar/Croatia, 19th-21st May 2015. Eds.: F. Pehar, C. Schloegl u. C. Wolff
  5. Riva, P.; Doerr, M.; Zumer, M.: FRBRoo: enabling a common view of information from memory institutions (2008) 0.01 
    0.007352009 = product of:
  0.029408036 = sum of:
    0.021604925 = weight(_text_:of in 3743) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021604925 = score(doc=3743,freq=30.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.33457235 = fieldWeight in 3743, product of:
          5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
            30.0 = termFreq=30.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3743)
    0.007803111 = product of:
      0.015606222 = sum of:
        0.015606222 = weight(_text_:on in 3743) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015606222 = score(doc=3743,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 3743, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3743)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    In 2008 the FRBR/CRM Harmonisation Working Group has achieved a major milestone: a complete version of the object-oriented definition of FRBR (FRBRoo) was released for comment. After a brief overview of the history and context of the Working Group, this paper focuses on the primary contributions resulting from this work. - FRBRoo is a self-contained document which expresses the concepts of FRBR using the objectoriented methodology and framework of CIDOC CRM. It is an alternative view on library conceptualisation for a different purpose, not a replacement for FRBR. - This 'translation' process presented an opportunity to verify and confirm FRBR's internal consistency. - FRBRoo offers a common view of library and museum documentation as two kinds of information from memory institutions. Such a common view is necessary to provide interoperable information systems for all users interested in accessing common or related content. - The analysis provided an opportunity for mutual enrichment of FRBR and CIDOC CRM. Examples include: - - Addition of the modelling of time and events to FRBR, which can be seen in its application to the publishing process - - Clarification of the manifestation entity - - Explicit modelling of performances and recordings in FRBR - - Adding the work entity to CRM - - Adding the identifier assignment process to CRM. - Producing a formalisation which is more suited for implementation with object-oriented tools, and which facilitates the testing and adoption of FRBR concepts in implementations with different functional specifications and in different environments.
  6. Zumer, M.: Implementation of FRBR : European research initiative (2004) 0.01 
    0.0071964967 = product of:
  0.028785987 = sum of:
    0.019957775 = weight(_text_:of in 5858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019957775 = score(doc=5858,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.3090647 = fieldWeight in 5858, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5858)
    0.008828212 = product of:
      0.017656423 = sum of:
        0.017656423 = weight(_text_:on in 5858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017656423 = score(doc=5858,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.19440265 = fieldWeight in 5858, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5858)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    The short history of European FRBR research is summarized. Immediately following the publication there was a lot of discussion, focusing mainly on the model itself and its appropriateness for description of library materials. Only later the focus has shifted towards implementation issues. Main topics are identified and two initiatives, originating from ELAG and IFLA, are described. An agenda of future research, which should result in FRBR implementation, is proposed.
  7. Zumer, M.: FRSAD: challenges of modeling the aboutness (2011) 0.01 
    0.006713625 = product of:
  0.0268545 = sum of:
    0.019129815 = weight(_text_:of in 4787) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019129815 = score(doc=4787,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.29624295 = fieldWeight in 4787, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4787)
    0.007724685 = product of:
      0.01544937 = sum of:
        0.01544937 = weight(_text_:on in 4787) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01544937 = score(doc=4787,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.17010231 = fieldWeight in 4787, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4787)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    The Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Records Working Group (FRSAR WG) is the third IFLA Working Group of the FRBR family. It was formed in April 2005 and it was charged with the task of developing a conceptual model of FRBR Group 3 entities within the FRBR framework as they relate to the "aboutness" of works. This paper introduces the Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD), the model developed by the FRSAR WG, and discusses issues raised during the world-wide review.
    Source
    Concepts in context: Proceedings of the Cologne Conference on Interoperability and Semantics in Knowledge Organization July 19th - 20th, 2010. Eds.: F. Boteram, W. Gödert u. J. Hubrich
  8. Budanovic, M.P.; Zumer, M.: ¬The catalogers' thought process : a comparison of formal and informal context (2018) 0.01 
    0.006713625 = product of:
  0.0268545 = sum of:
    0.019129815 = weight(_text_:of in 5180) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019129815 = score(doc=5180,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.29624295 = fieldWeight in 5180, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5180)
    0.007724685 = product of:
      0.01544937 = sum of:
        0.01544937 = weight(_text_:on in 5180) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01544937 = score(doc=5180,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.17010231 = fieldWeight in 5180, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5180)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    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.
  9. Salaba, A.; Zeng, M.L.; Zumer, M.: Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Records (2006) 0.01 
    0.006635946 = product of:
  0.026543785 = sum of:
    0.015619429 = weight(_text_:of in 279) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015619429 = score(doc=279,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.24188137 = fieldWeight in 279, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=279)
    0.010924355 = product of:
      0.02184871 = sum of:
        0.02184871 = weight(_text_:on in 279) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02184871 = score(doc=279,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.24056101 = fieldWeight in 279, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=279)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    Continuing the tradition set by the FRBR model, a new IFLA working group was formed to examine the functional requirements for subject authority records (FRSAR). The focus of the FRSAR Working Group is on the user tasks and functional requirements of authority records for the Group 3 entities as defined by FRBR. This paper presents the Working Group's terms of reference and reports on initial activities and subject authority issues discussed.
    Source
    Knowledge organization for a global learning society: Proceedings of the 9th International ISKO Conference, 4-7 July 2006, Vienna, Austria. Hrsg.: G. Budin, C. Swertz u. K. Mitgutsch
  10. Pauman Budanovic, M.; Zumer, M.: Prototype cataloging interface based on the IFLA Library Reference Model (LRM). Part 1 : conceptual design (2021) 0.01 
    0.006635946 = product of:
  0.026543785 = sum of:
    0.015619429 = weight(_text_:of in 700) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015619429 = score(doc=700,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.24188137 = fieldWeight in 700, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=700)
    0.010924355 = product of:
      0.02184871 = sum of:
        0.02184871 = weight(_text_:on in 700) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02184871 = score(doc=700,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.24056101 = fieldWeight in 700, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=700)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    The aim of this paper is to present a prototype cataloging interface, which provides easier data entry, follows the cataloger's thought process and is based on the advantages of the IFLA LRM model. The paper summarizes all stages of the conceptual design and shows how the LRM was implemented. The main purpose of the cataloging interface design is to show how a LRM-based cataloging module might look like and how it could improve the existing cataloging process.
  11. Mercun, T.; Zumer, M.; Aalberg, T.: Presenting bibliographic families : Designing an FRBR-based prototype using information visualization (2016) 0.01 
    0.0065761153 = product of:
  0.026304461 = sum of:
    0.01850135 = weight(_text_:of in 2879) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01850135 = score(doc=2879,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.28651062 = fieldWeight in 2879, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2879)
    0.007803111 = product of:
      0.015606222 = sum of:
        0.015606222 = weight(_text_:on in 2879) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015606222 = score(doc=2879,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 2879, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2879)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    Purpose - Despite the importance of bibliographic information systems for discovering and exploring library resources, some of the core functionality that should be provided to support users in their information seeking process is still missing. Investigating these issues, the purpose of this paper is to design a solution that would fulfil the missing objectives. Design/methodology/approach - Building on the concepts of a work family, functional requirements for bibliographic records (FRBR) and information visualization, the paper proposes a model and user interface design that could support a more efficient and user-friendly presentation and navigation in bibliographic information systems. Findings - The proposed design brings together all versions of a work, related works, and other works by and about the author and shows how the model was implemented into a FrbrVis prototype system using hierarchical visualization layout. Research limitations/implications - Although issues related to discovery and exploration apply to various material types, the research first focused on works of fiction and was also limited by the selected sample of records. Practical implications - The model for presenting and interacting with FRBR-based data can serve as a good starting point for future developments and implementations. Originality/value - With FRBR concepts being gradually integrated into cataloguing rules, formats, and various bibliographic services, one of the important questions that has not really been investigated and studied is how the new type of data would be presented to users in a way that would exploit the true potential of the changes.
    Source
    Journal of documentation. 72(2016) no.3, S.490-526
  12. Aalberg, T.; Zumer, M.: ¬The value of MARC data, or, challenges of frbrisation (2013) 0.01 
    0.006210416 = product of:
  0.024841664 = sum of:
    0.019324033 = weight(_text_:of in 1769) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019324033 = score(doc=1769,freq=24.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.2992506 = fieldWeight in 1769, product of:
          4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
            24.0 = termFreq=24.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1769)
    0.0055176322 = product of:
      0.0110352645 = sum of:
        0.0110352645 = weight(_text_:on in 1769) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0110352645 = score(doc=1769,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 1769, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1769)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    Purpose - Bibliographic records should now be used in innovative end-user applications that enable users to learn about, discover and exploit available content, and this information should be interpreted and reused also beyond the library domain. New conceptual models such as FRBR offer the foundation for such developments. The main motivation for this research is to contribute to the adoption of the FRBR model in future bibliographic standards and systems, by analysing limitations in existing bibliographic information and looking for short- and long-term solutions that can improve the data quality in terms of expressing the FRBR model. Design/methodology/approach - MARC records in three collections (BIBSYS catalogue, Slovenian National Bibliography and BTJ catalogue) were first analysed by looking at statistics of field and subfield usage to determine common patterns that express FRBR. Based on this, different rules for interpreting the information were developed. Finally typical problems/errors found in MARC records were analysed. Findings - Different types of FRBR entity-relationship structures that typically can be found in bibliographic records are identified. Problems related to interpreting these from bibliographic records are analyzed. Frbrisation of consistent and complete MARC records is relatively successful, particularly if all entities are systematically described and relationships among them are clearly indicated. Research limitations/implications - Advanced matching was not used for clustering of identical entities. Practical implications - Cataloguing guidelines are proposed to enable better frbrisation of MARC records in the interim period, before new formats are developed and implemented. Originality/value - This is the first in depth analysis of manifestations embodying several expressions and of works and agents as subjects.
    Source
    Journal of documentation. 69(2013) no.6, S.851-872
  13. Riva, P.; Boeuf, P. le; Zumer, M.: IFLA Library Reference Model : a conceptual model for bibliographic information (2017) 0.01 
    0.0061127944 = product of:
  0.024451178 = sum of:
    0.013526822 = weight(_text_:of in 5179) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013526822 = score(doc=5179,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.20947541 = fieldWeight in 5179, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5179)
    0.010924355 = product of:
      0.02184871 = sum of:
        0.02184871 = weight(_text_:on in 5179) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02184871 = score(doc=5179,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.24056101 = fieldWeight in 5179, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5179)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    Definition of a conceptual reference model to provide a framework for the analysis of non-administrative metadata relating to library resources. The resulting model definition was approved by the FRBR Review Group (November 2016), and then made available to the Standing Committees of the Sections on Cataloguing and Subject Analysis & Access, as well as to the ISBD Review Group, for comment in December 2016. The final document was approved by the IFLACommittee on Standards (August 2017).
  14. Mercun, T.; Zumer, M.; Aalberg, T.: Presenting bibliographic families using information visualization : evaluation of FRBR-based prototype and hierarchical visualizations (2017) 0.01 
    0.0056405207 = product of:
  0.022562083 = sum of:
    0.014758972 = weight(_text_:of in 3350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014758972 = score(doc=3350,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.22855641 = fieldWeight in 3350, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3350)
    0.007803111 = product of:
      0.015606222 = sum of:
        0.015606222 = weight(_text_:on in 3350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015606222 = score(doc=3350,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 3350, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3350)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    Since their beginnings, bibliographic information systems have been displaying results in the form of long, textual lists. With the development of new data models and computer technologies, the need for new approaches to present and interact with bibliographic data has slowly been maturing. To investigate how this could be accomplished, a prototype system, FrbrVis1, was designed to present work families within a bibliographic information system using information visualization. This paper reports on two user studies, a controlled and an observational experiment, that have been carried out to assess the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR)-based against an existing system as well as to test four different hierarchical visual layouts. The results clearly show that FrbrVis offers better performance and user experience compared to the baseline system. The differences between the four hierarchical visualizations (Indented tree, Radial tree, Circlepack, and Sunburst) were, on the other hand, not as pronounced, but the Indented tree and Sunburst design proved to be the most successful, both in performance as well as user perception. The paper therefore not only evaluates the application of a visual presentation of bibliographic work families, but also provides valuable results regarding the performance and user acceptance of individual hierarchical visualization techniques.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 68(2017) no.2, S.392-411
  15. Dimec, Z.; Zumer, M.; Riesthuis, G.J.A.: Slovenian cataloguing practice and Functional Requirements for Bibliography Records : a comparative analysis (2004) 0.01 
    0.0055631828 = product of:
  0.022252731 = sum of:
    0.0167351 = weight(_text_:of in 5857) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0167351 = score(doc=5857,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.25915858 = fieldWeight in 5857, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5857)
    0.0055176322 = product of:
      0.0110352645 = sum of:
        0.0110352645 = weight(_text_:on in 5857) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0110352645 = score(doc=5857,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 5857, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5857)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    The IFLA study Functional requirements for bibliographic records (FRBR) set a new frame for both cataloguing codes and subject analysis. The Paris Principles defined the functions of the catalogue followed by both cataloguing codes used in Slovenia: P. Kalan's Abecedni imenski katalog and E. Verona's Pravilnik i prirunik za izradbe abecednih kataloga. FRBR defines the functions for records themselves, irrespective of the type of the database consisting of these records. Compared to the requirements for the national bibliographic records as defined by FRBR, the records belonging to the Slovenian national bibliography show more descriptive elements and less notes on bibliographic history, which reflects in lack of uniform titles. As the uniform title itself enables the identification of related works and their expressions, this practice does not satisfy the FRBR requirements. Differences in the extent of records for different types of material derive from decentralised processing at the National and University Library. It is therefore necessary to establish uniform criteria for both the materials included into the Slovenian national bibliography, and the extent of data elements.
  16. Zumer, M.; Zeng, M.L.: Application of FRBR and FRSAD to classification systems (2015) 0.01 
    0.005323909 = product of:
  0.021295637 = sum of:
    0.015778005 = weight(_text_:of in 2284) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015778005 = score(doc=2284,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.24433708 = fieldWeight in 2284, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2284)
    0.0055176322 = product of:
      0.0110352645 = sum of:
        0.0110352645 = weight(_text_:on in 2284) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0110352645 = score(doc=2284,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 2284, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2284)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    The Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD) conceptual model defines entities, attributes and relationships as they relate to subject authority data. FRSAD includes two main entities, thema (any entity used as the subject of a work) and nomen (any sign or arrangement of signs that a thema is known by, referred to, or addressed as). In a given controlled vocabulary and within a domain, a nomen is the appellation of only one thema. The authors consider the question: can the FRSAD conceptual model be extended beyond controlled vocabularies (its original focus) to model classification data? Models that are developed based on the structures and functions of controlled vocabularies (such as thesauri and subject heading systems) often need to be adjusted or extended to accommodate classification systems that have been developed with different focused functions, structures and fundamental theories. The Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) system and Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) are used as a case study to test applicability of the FRSAD model for classification data and the applicability of the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) for modelling versions, such as different adaptations and different language editions.
    Source
    Classification and authority control: expanding resource discovery: proceedings of the International UDC Seminar 2015, 29-30 October 2015, Lisbon, Portugal. Eds.: Slavic, A. u. M.I. Cordeiro
  17. Takhirov, N.; Aalberg, T.; Duchateau, F.; Zumer, M.: FRBR-ML: a FRBR-based framework for semantic interoperability (2012) 0.01 
    0.005158847 = product of:
  0.020635389 = sum of:
    0.011807178 = weight(_text_:of in 134) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011807178 = score(doc=134,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.18284513 = fieldWeight in 134, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=134)
    0.008828212 = product of:
      0.017656423 = sum of:
        0.017656423 = weight(_text_:on in 134) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017656423 = score(doc=134,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.19440265 = fieldWeight in 134, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=134)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    Metadata related to cultural items such as literature, music and movies is a valuable resource that is currently exploited in many applications and services based on semantic web technologies. A vast amount of such information has been created by memory institutions in the last decades using different standard or ad hoc schemas, and a main challenge is to make this legacy data accessible as reusable semantic data. On one hand, this is a syntactic problem that can be solved by transforming to formats that are compatible with the tools and services used for semantic aware services. On the other hand, this is a semantic problem. Simply transforming from one format to another does not automatically enable semantic interoperability and legacy data often needs to be reinterpreted as well as transformed. The conceptual model in the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records, initially developed as a conceptual framework for library standards and systems, is a major step towards a shared semantic model of the products of artistic and intellectual endeavor of mankind. The model is generally accepted as sufficiently generic to serve as a conceptual framework for a broad range of cultural heritage metadata. Unfortunately, the existing large body of legacy data makes a transition to this model difficult. For instance, most bibliographic data is still only available in various MARC-based formats which is hard to render into reusable and meaningful semantic data. Making legacy bibliographic data accessible as semantic data is a complex problem that includes interpreting and transforming the information. In this article, we present our work on transforming and enhancing legacy bibliographic information into a representation where the structure and semantics of the FRBR model is explicit.
  18. Zumer, M.; O'Neill, E.T.: Modeling aggregates in FRBR (2012) 0.01 
    0.00500231 = product of:
  0.02000924 = sum of:
    0.013388081 = weight(_text_:of in 1913) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013388081 = score(doc=1913,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.20732689 = fieldWeight in 1913, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1913)
    0.006621159 = product of:
      0.013242318 = sum of:
        0.013242318 = weight(_text_:on in 1913) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013242318 = score(doc=1913,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.14580199 = fieldWeight in 1913, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1913)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    In the bibliographic environment, the term aggregate is used to describe a bibliographic entity formed by combining distinct bibliographic units together. Aggregates are a large and growing class of information resources-up to twenty percent of the bibliographic records in OCLC's WorldCat may represent aggregates. The Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records: Final Report only briefly references aggregates. Difficulties and inconsistencies in the application of the FRBR model to aggregates have been identified as a significant impediment to FRBR implementation. To address the issue, the FRBR Review Group established a Working Group on Aggregates which completed its charge and submitted its final report in 2011. The Working Group proposed that an aggregate be defined as a "manifestation embodying multiple distinct expressions". This paper examines the proposed definition and explores how aggregates can be modeled.
    Content
    Contribution to a special issue "The FRBR family of conceptual models: toward a linked future"
  19. Le Boeuf, P.; Riva, P.; Zumer, M.: FRBR - Library Reference Model : draft for World-Wide Review (2016) 0.01 
    0.00500231 = product of:
  0.02000924 = sum of:
    0.013388081 = weight(_text_:of in 2881) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013388081 = score(doc=2881,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.20732689 = fieldWeight in 2881, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2881)
    0.006621159 = product of:
      0.013242318 = sum of:
        0.013242318 = weight(_text_:on in 2881) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013242318 = score(doc=2881,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.14580199 = fieldWeight in 2881, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2881)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    The FRBR Review Group worked actively towards a consolidated model starting in 2010, in a series of working meetings held in conjunction with IFLA conferences and at an additional mid-year meeting in April 2012 during which the user task consolidation was first drafted. In 2013 in Singapore, the FRBR Review Group constituted a Consolidation Editorial Group (CEG) to focus on the detailed reassessment of attribute s and relationships, and the drafting of this model document. The CEG (at times with other FRBR Review Group members or invited experts) held five multi-day meetings, as well as discussing progress in detail with the FRBR Review Group as a whole during a working meeting in 2014 in Lyon and another in 2015 in Cape Town.
    Editor
    IFLA / Consolidation Editorial Group of the IFLA FRBR Review Group
  20. Riva, P.; Zumer, M.: Introducing the FRBR library reference model (2015) 0.00 
    0.0035982484 = product of:
  0.014392993 = sum of:
    0.009978888 = weight(_text_:of in 2094) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009978888 = score(doc=2094,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.15453234 = fieldWeight in 2094, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2094)
    0.004414106 = product of:
      0.008828212 = sum of:
        0.008828212 = weight(_text_:on in 2094) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008828212 = score(doc=2094,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.097201325 = fieldWeight in 2094, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2094)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    The FR family of conceptual models has grown to include three separate models prepared independently over many years by different working groups: FRBR for bibliographic data, FRAD for authority data, and FRSAD for subject authority data. Even as FRAD and FRSAD were being finalized in 2009-2010, it became clear that it would be necessary to combine or consolidate the FR family into a single coherent model to clarify the understanding of the overall model and remove barriers to its adoption. The FRBR Review Group has been working towards this since 2011, constituting a Consolidation Editorial Group in 2013. The consolidation task involves not only spelling out how the three existing models fit together, but requires taking a fresh look at the models to incorporate insights gained since their initial publications. This paper, based directly on the work of the Consolidation Editorial Group, provides the first public report of the consolidated model, tentatively referred to as the FRBR-Library Reference Model (FRBR-LRM), and the guiding principles that have been applied in its development.
    Content
    Paper presented at: IFLA WLIC 2015 - Cape Town, South Africa in Session 207 - Cataloguing. Vgl. den Kommentar von H. Wiesenmüller [Mail vom 25.06.2015]: "hier etwas höchst Spannendes - eine knappe Darstellung des konsolidierten FR-Modells, auf das wir schon so lange warten, und das im kommenden Jahr in das weltweite Begutachtungsverfahren gehen soll: http://library.ifla.org/1084/. Ich muss das Paper selbst auch erst in Ruhe lesen, sehe aber beim schnellen Durchblättern mit Freude bestätigt, dass die Gruppe-3-Entitäten aus FRBR tatsächlich abgeschafft werden. Die FRSAD-Entität "Thema" (die für alles stehen kann, was Thema eins Werks ist) wird umgetauft in "Res" (von lateinisch "res", Sache) und steht für "any entity in the universe of discourse". Die Entitäten der Gruppe 2 heißen jetzt zusammenfassend "Agent" und teilen sich auf in "Person" und "Group", wobei letzteres Körperschaften und Familien umfasst. Neu eingeführt wird "Time-span". Auf den ersten Blick scheint das jedenfalls alles ganz gut durchdacht zu sein."

Authors

Years

Types

  • a 45
  • el 12
  • r 2
  • m 1
  • n 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications