-
Layne, S.S.: Brian E. Schottlaender : politics and philosophy of bibliographic control, a conversation (1999)
0.04
0.03527055 = product of:
0.1645959 = sum of:
0.047104023 = weight(_text_:classification in 5622) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047104023 = score(doc=5622,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.49260917 = fieldWeight in 5622, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5622)
0.070387855 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5622) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.070387855 = score(doc=5622,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.6021745 = fieldWeight in 5622, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5622)
0.047104023 = weight(_text_:classification in 5622) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047104023 = score(doc=5622,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.49260917 = fieldWeight in 5622, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5622)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 28(1999) no.4, S.71-89
-
Clarke, R.I.: Breaking records : the history of bibliographic records and their influence in conceptualizing bibliographic data (2015)
0.03
0.031424463 = product of:
0.14664748 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1877) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1877,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1877, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1877)
0.09954346 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1877) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09954346 = score(doc=1877,freq=16.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.8516034 = fieldWeight in 1877, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1877)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1877) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1877,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1877, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1877)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- A bibliographic record is a conceptual whole that includes all bibliographic information about a resource together in one place. With the Semantic Web, individual data statements are linked across the web. This position article argues that the traditional conceptualization of bibliographic records affects the affordances and limitations of that data. A historical analysis of the development of bibliographic records contrasted with the Semantic Web model reveals how the "record" model shaped library cataloging and the implications on library catalogs today. Reification of the record model for bibliographic data hampers possibilities for innovation in cataloging, inspiring a reconceptualization of bibliographic description.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 53(2015) no.3/4, S.286-302
-
Seikel, M.: General notes in catalog records versus FRBR user tasks (2013)
0.02
0.02075909 = product of:
0.09687576 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1929) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1929,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1929, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1929)
0.04977173 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1929) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04977173 = score(doc=1929,freq=4.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.4258017 = fieldWeight in 1929, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1929)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1929) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1929,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1929, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1929)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- This article analyzes the literature concerning uses of notes in bibliographic records and also certain grammatical conventions used by catalogers to communicate information about the resources they are describing. It shows that these types of data do not aid the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) user tasks in the resource discovery process. It also describes how general notes are addressed in Resource Description Access (RDA), and advocates that cataloging practices involving most general notes and such conventions as bracketing and abbreviations should be discontinued with the widespread use of RDA.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 51(2013) no.4, S.420-427
-
Hurowitz, R.; Kalinsky, K.; McDonald, D.R.; Deventer, B.V.: Future catalogs and bibliographic links at Stanford University Libraries (1981)
0.02
0.020154601 = product of:
0.0940548 = sum of:
0.026916584 = weight(_text_:classification in 272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026916584 = score(doc=272,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 272, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=272)
0.04022163 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04022163 = score(doc=272,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.34409973 = fieldWeight in 272, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=272)
0.026916584 = weight(_text_:classification in 272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026916584 = score(doc=272,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 272, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=272)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 1(1981) no.1, S.43-58
-
Bianchini, C.; Guerrini, M.: ¬A turning point for catalogs : Ranganathan's possible point of view (2015)
0.02
0.019848065 = product of:
0.09262431 = sum of:
0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 2006) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02018744 = score(doc=2006,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 2006, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2006)
0.05224943 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2006) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05224943 = score(doc=2006,freq=6.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.44699866 = fieldWeight in 2006, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2006)
0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 2006) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02018744 = score(doc=2006,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 2006, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2006)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- Since the end of the last century, catalogs have been changing more and more quickly. This change is following a recognizable course, beginning with the publication of Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records, passing through the reorganization of international cataloging principles, the revision of international standards of the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (International Standard for Bibliographic Description), and the foundation of new cataloging codes, such as Resource Description and Access. While principles, models, and rules are well established, bibliographic formats seem to be a bottleneck and users seem far from libraries. This article aims to present an overview of current changes, potential convergences, developments, and weak points from Ranganathan's point of view.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 53(2015) no.3/4, S.341-351
-
Weinheimer, J.: ¬A visual explanation of the areas defined by AACR2, RDA, ISBD, LC NAF, LC Classification, LC Subject Headings, Dewey Classification, MARC21 : plus a quick look at ISO2709, MARCXML and a version of BIBFRAME (2015)
0.02
0.017691448 = product of:
0.08256009 = sum of:
0.02546139 = weight(_text_:subject in 2882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02546139 = score(doc=2882,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.23709705 = fieldWeight in 2882, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2882)
0.028549349 = weight(_text_:classification in 2882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028549349 = score(doc=2882,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.29856625 = fieldWeight in 2882, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2882)
0.028549349 = weight(_text_:classification in 2882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028549349 = score(doc=2882,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.29856625 = fieldWeight in 2882, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2882)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
-
Bianchini, C.; Guerrini, M.: From bibliographic models to cataloguing rules : remarks on FRBR, ICP, ISBD, and RDA and the relationships between them (2009)
0.02
0.017635275 = product of:
0.08229795 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 2973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=2973,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 2973, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2973)
0.035193928 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035193928 = score(doc=2973,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.30108726 = fieldWeight in 2973, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2973)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 2973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=2973,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 2973, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2973)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 47(2009) no.2, S.xx-xx
-
Petrucciani, A.: Quality of library catalogs and value of (good) catalogs (2015)
0.02
0.017635275 = product of:
0.08229795 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1878) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1878,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1878, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1878)
0.035193928 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1878) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035193928 = score(doc=1878,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.30108726 = fieldWeight in 1878, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1878)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1878) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1878,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1878, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1878)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- The quality of large catalogs is uneven and often low, but this issue is underrated and understudied. Library catalogs often fail to communicate correct and clear information to users and their low quality is not simply due to faults, duplications, and so on but also to unwise cataloging standards and policies. While there is plenty of uncontrolled information about books and other publications, the need for good-quality bibliographic information is apparent and library catalogs may provide a trustworthy map of the publishing output, with full control of editions, works, authors, and so on and effective navigation functions, which are lacking in today's information-rich environment.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 53(2015) no.3/4, S.303-313
-
Wynne, S.C.; Hanscom, M.J.: ¬The effect of next-generation catalogs on catalogers and cataloging functions in academic libraries (2011)
0.02
0.017635275 = product of:
0.08229795 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1889) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1889,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1889, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1889)
0.035193928 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1889) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035193928 = score(doc=1889,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.30108726 = fieldWeight in 1889, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1889)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1889) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1889,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1889, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1889)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- Next-generation catalogs or discovery tools (NGCs) overlay existing bibliographic data and repackage it in displays that differ from the traditional catalog. Many implementations of NGCs have revealed errors, omissions, or inconsistencies in the underlying data that had not been apparent in the traditional catalog. This study explored the effect of NGCs on cataloging functions and catalogers in academic libraries, examining catalogers' participation in the selection and implementation processes, identifying and correcting data problems, changes to procedures or workflow, and staffing.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 49(2011) no.3, S.179-207
-
Miksa, S.D.: Educators: what are the cataloging issues students get excited about? : professional and intellectual appeals of cataloging and students' misconceptions of cataloging (2008)
0.02
0.016459066 = product of:
0.076808974 = sum of:
0.029704956 = weight(_text_:subject in 786) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029704956 = score(doc=786,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.27661324 = fieldWeight in 786, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=786)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 786) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=786,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 786, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=786)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 786) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=786,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 786, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=786)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- This paper discusses the professional and intellectual appeals demonstrated by cataloging students, as well as some common misconceptions. Given the current digital environment and the "Amazoogle" effect, students face many challenges when striving to complete a basic course in descriptive and subject cataloging. In the process, they face issues of varieties of information objects, how to tame tools such as AACR2 and LCSH, and how MARC encoding fits into the overall process of cataloging. They also must learn to re-conceptualize their ideas of copy cataloging and learn to appreciate the authoritative power that comes with using and applying cataloger's judgment.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 45(2008) no.3, S.17-24
-
Theimer, S.: ¬A cataloger's resolution to become more creative : how and why (2012)
0.01
0.01314472 = product of:
0.061342027 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1934,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1934, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1934)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1934,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1934, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1934)
0.014238005 = product of:
0.02847601 = sum of:
0.02847601 = weight(_text_:22 in 1934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02847601 = score(doc=1934,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1934, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1934)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Date
- 29. 5.2015 11:08:22
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 50(2012) no.8, S.894-902
-
Smiraglia, R.P.: Rethinking what we catalog : documents as cultural artifacts (2008)
0.01
0.012596626 = product of:
0.058784254 = sum of:
0.016822865 = weight(_text_:classification in 789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016822865 = score(doc=789,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 789, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=789)
0.02513852 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02513852 = score(doc=789,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.21506234 = fieldWeight in 789, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=789)
0.016822865 = weight(_text_:classification in 789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016822865 = score(doc=789,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 789, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=789)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- Cataloging is at its most interesting when it is comprehended as part of a larger, meaningful, objective. Resource description is a complex task; but the essence of librarianship is curatorship of a collection, and that sense of curatorial responsibility is one of the things that makes resource description into cataloging-that is, professional responsibility is the difference between the task of transcription and the satisfaction of professional decisions well-made. Part of the essential difference is comprehension of the cultural milieu from which specific resources arise, and the modes of scholarship that might be used to nudge them to reveal their secrets for the advancement of knowledge. In this paper I describe a course designed to lend excitement and professional judgment to the education of future catalogers and collection managers by conveying the notion that all documents are, in fact, cultural artifacts. Part of a knowledge-sensitive curriculum for knowledge organization, the purpose of this course is to go beyond the concept of documents as mere packets of information to demonstrate that each is a product of its time and circumstances. Bibliographic skill leads to greater comfort with the intellectual and cultural forces that impel the creation of documents. Students become comfortable with the curatorial side of cataloging - the placement of each document in its cultural milieu as the goal of resource description, rather than the act of description itself.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 45(2008) no.3, S.25-37
-
Lee, W.-C.: Conflicts of semantic warrants in cataloging practices (2017)
0.01
0.011756477 = product of:
0.054863557 = sum of:
0.021217827 = weight(_text_:subject in 3871) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021217827 = score(doc=3871,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.19758089 = fieldWeight in 3871, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3871)
0.016822865 = weight(_text_:classification in 3871) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016822865 = score(doc=3871,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 3871, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3871)
0.016822865 = weight(_text_:classification in 3871) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016822865 = score(doc=3871,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 3871, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3871)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- This study presents preliminary themes surfaced from an ongoing ethnographic study. The research question is: how and where do cultures influence the cataloging practices of using U.S. standards to catalog Chinese materials? The author applies warrant as a lens for evaluating knowledge representation systems, and extends the application from examining classificatory decisions to cataloging decisions. Semantic warrant as a conceptual tool allows us to recognize and name the various rationales behind cataloging decisions, grants us explanatory power, and the language to "visualize" and reflect on the conflicting priorities in cataloging practices. Through participatory observation, the author recorded the cataloging practices of two Chinese catalogers working on the same cataloging project. One of the catalogers is U.S. trained, and another cataloger is a professor of Library and Information Science from China, who is also a subject expert and a cataloger of Chinese special collections. The study shows how the catalogers describe Chinese special collections using many U.S. cataloging and classification standards but from different approaches. The author presents particular cases derived from the fieldwork, with an emphasis on the many layers presented by cultures, principles, standards, and practices of different scope, each of which may represent conflicting warrants. From this, it is made clear that the conflicts of warrants influence cataloging practice. We may view the conflicting warrants as an interpretation of the tension between different semantic warrants and the globalization and localization of cataloging standards.
-
Managing cataloging and the organization of information : philosophies, practices and challenges at the onset of the 21st century (2000)
0.01
0.010266919 = product of:
0.047912285 = sum of:
0.02039664 = weight(_text_:classification in 238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02039664 = score(doc=238,freq=6.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.21330604 = fieldWeight in 238, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=238)
0.02039664 = weight(_text_:classification in 238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02039664 = score(doc=238,freq=6.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.21330604 = fieldWeight in 238, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=238)
0.0071190023 = product of:
0.014238005 = sum of:
0.014238005 = weight(_text_:22 in 238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014238005 = score(doc=238,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 238, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=238)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Footnote
- Rez. in ZfBB 51(2004) H.1, S.54-55 (G. Pflug): "Unter dem wachsenden Einfluss der Informationstechnologie auf den Bibliotheksbereich nimmt die Katalogisierung eine Schlüsselstellung ein. Das vorliegende Werk gliedert sich in zwei Teile. Der erste Abschnitt ist mit »National Libraries« überschrieben, befasst sich jedoch nur mit der Library of Congress und der National Library of Canada. Ihm folgen Artikel über »Libraries around the world«. Dabei fälltjedoch auf, dass diese Studien zwar Bibliotheken in Großbritannien, Australien, Mittel- und Südamerika und selbst Afrika (Botswana) behandeln, nicht jedoch aus Kontinentaleuropa, trotz entsprechender Aktivitäten etwa in den Niederlanden, in Frankreich oder den deutschsprachigen Ländern. Nur DOBIS/LIBIS wird erwähnt, aber nur, weil es für kurze Zeit die kanadische Entwicklung beeinflusst hat. Im zweiten Teil kommen Katalogisierungsfachleute aus vier Spezial- und neun akademischen Bibliotheken - ausschließlich aus Nordamerika und Großbritannien - zu Wort. So enthält das Werk in 22 Beispielen Berichte über individuelle und regionale Lösungen. Dabei steht die Frage im Vordergrund, zu welchen Änderungen in der Katalogisierungs- und Sacherschließungspraxis die neuen elektronischen Techniken geführt haben. So streben z.B. die englischen Hochschulbibliotheken ein koordiniertes System an. Mit dem Übergang der British Library zu MARC 21 wird das Katalogsystem in Großbritannien nachhaltig beeinflusst - um nur zwei nahe liegende Beispiele zu nennen. Insgesamt werden drei Aspekte behandelt, die Automatisierungstechnik; die dabei einzusetzende Kooperation und das Outsourcing - nicht nur durch Übernahme von Daten anderer Bibliotheken oder durch Verbundsysteme, vor allem der Library of Congress, sondern auch durch Buchhandelsfirmen wie Blackwell North America Authority Control Service. In der Frage der Sacherschließung befassen sich die Beiträge mit den im amerikanischen Bereich üblichen Klassifikationssystemen, vor allem der Colon Classification, Dewey in seinen beiden Formen oder der Library of Congress Classification. Für die deutsche Diskussion sind diese Aspekte vor allem wegen des Übergangs der Deutschen Bibliothek in ihrer Nationalbibliografie zur DDC von großem Interesse (vgl. Magda Heiner-Freiling: Die DDC in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie. In Dialog mit Bibliotheken. 15. 2003, Nr. 3, S. 8-13). Doch stellen auch die unterschiedlichen Überlegungen zur alphabetischen Katalogisierung, verbunden mit den da zugehörigen Datenbanken, einen interessanten Beitrag zur augenblicklichen Diskussion in Deutschland dar, da auch hier seit einigen Jahren die Katalogisierung nach RAK und ihre Ablösung eine lebhafte Diskussion ausgelöst hat, wie unter anderem der zusammenfassende Beitrag von Elisabeth Niggemann in: Dialog mit Bibliotheken (15. 2003, Nr. 2, S. 4-8) zeigt. Auch die angloamerikanischen und die mit ihnen zum Beispiel in Mexiko, Südamerika oder Australien verbundenen Bibliotheken - das zeigt das Buch deutlich - diskutieren die Frage der alphabetischen Katalogisierung kontrovers. So werden z.B. neben den dominanten AACR-Regeln mit ihrer Weiterentwicklung mehr als zehn andere Katalogisierungssysteme und rund 20 Online-Datenbanken behandelt. Damit liefert das Buch für die Diskussion in Deutschland und die anstehenden Entscheidungen in seiner Grundtendenz wie in den unterschiedlichen-auch widersprüchlichen-Aspekten dereinzelnen Beiträge wertvolle Anregungen."
- Series
- Cataloging and classification quarterly; vol.30, no.1
-
Lubetzky, S.: Principles of cataloging (2001)
0.01
0.009251289 = product of:
0.06475902 = sum of:
0.021217827 = weight(_text_:subject in 2627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021217827 = score(doc=2627,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.19758089 = fieldWeight in 2627, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2627)
0.043541197 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043541197 = score(doc=2627,freq=6.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.3724989 = fieldWeight in 2627, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2627)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- This report constitutes Phase I of a two-part study; a Phase II report will discuss subject cataloging. Phase I is concerned with the materials of a library as individual records (or documents) and as representations of certain works by certain authors--that is, with descriptive, or bibliographic, cataloging. Discussed in the report are (1) the history, role, function, and oblectives .of the author-and-title catalog; (2) problems and principles of descriptive catalogng, including the use and function of "main entry, the principle of authorship, and the process and problems of cataloging print and nonprint materials; (3) organization of the catalog; and (4) potentialities of automation. The considerations inherent in bibliographic cataloging, such as the distinction between the "book" and the "work," are said to be so elemental that they are essential not only to the effective control of library's materials but also to that of the information contained in the materials. Because of the special concern with information, the author includes a discussion of the "Bibliographic Dimensions of Information Control," 'prepared in collaboration with Robert M. Hayes, which also appears in "American Documentation," VOl.201 July 1969, p. 247-252.
-
Rijk Spanhoff, E. de: Principle issues : catalog paradigms, old and new (2002)
0.01
0.008156957 = product of:
0.057098698 = sum of:
0.028549349 = weight(_text_:classification in 5481) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028549349 = score(doc=5481,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.29856625 = fieldWeight in 5481, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5481)
0.028549349 = weight(_text_:classification in 5481) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028549349 = score(doc=5481,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.29856625 = fieldWeight in 5481, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5481)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Footnote
- Beitrag eines Themenheftes: Historical aspects of cataloging and classification; Part I
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 35(2002) nos.1/2, S.37-59
-
Lubetzky, S.: Cataloging rules and principles : a critique of the A.L.A. rules for entry and a proposed design for their revision (1953)
0.01
0.007690453 = product of:
0.053833168 = sum of:
0.026916584 = weight(_text_:classification in 2278) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026916584 = score(doc=2278,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 2278, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2278)
0.026916584 = weight(_text_:classification in 2278) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026916584 = score(doc=2278,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 2278, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2278)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Issue
- Prepared for the Board on Cataloging Policy and Research of the A.L.A. Division of Cataloging and Classification.
-
Goossens, P.; Mazur-Rzesos, E.: Hierarchical relationships in bibliographic descriptions : problem analysis (1982)
0.01
0.007464205 = product of:
0.10449886 = sum of:
0.10449886 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 4619) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10449886 = score(doc=4619,freq=6.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.8939973 = fieldWeight in 4619, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4619)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Abstract
- Beitrag zur Frage der Bibliographic relationships
- Source
- Hierarchical relationships in bibliographic records, INTERMARC software subgroup seminar 4, Essen, 25.3.-27.3.1981
-
Tillett, B.B.: ¬A taxonomy of bibliographic relationships (1991)
0.01
0.00703732 = product of:
0.09852248 = sum of:
0.09852248 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 6686) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09852248 = score(doc=6686,freq=12.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.84286875 = fieldWeight in 6686, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6686)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Abstract
- A bibliographic relationship is an association between two or more bibliographic items or works. In an effort to provide the theoretical base for a conceptual model of the library catalog, past and future, the bibliographic relationship is examined here in detail. In this first of a series of reports, a taxonomy of bibliographic relationships is derived from an analysis of cataloging rules and types of bibliographic items.
-
Riemer, J.J.: CONSER'S aggregator survey and the work of the PCC Task Group (1999)
0.01
0.0067291465 = product of:
0.047104023 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 5360) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=5360,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 5360, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5360)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 5360) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=5360,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 5360, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5360)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 28(1999) no.4, S.7-13
