Search (11 results, page 1 of 1)

0.04010655 = product of:
  0.0802131 = sum of:
    0.05305003 = weight(_text_:library in 695) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05305003 = score(doc=695,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.40253976 = fieldWeight in 695, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=695)
    0.027163066 = product of:
      0.054326132 = sum of:
        0.054326132 = weight(_text_:22 in 695) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054326132 = score(doc=695,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 695, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=695)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

One of the most common errors in cataloguing library materials involves miscoding of the nonfiling indicator of title fields. Notes the extent of the problem and its negative effect on searching in the library's online catalogue and surveys how librarians have approached solutions to the problems. Describes how the major library automation system address this problem

Date

6. 3.1997 16:22:15

Source

Library software review. 16(1997) no.3, S.152-155

0.037334766 = product of:
  0.07466953 = sum of:
    0.051698197 = weight(_text_:digital in 1149) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.051698197 = score(doc=1149,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.26148933 = fieldWeight in 1149, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1149)
    0.022971334 = weight(_text_:library in 1149) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022971334 = score(doc=1149,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.17430481 = fieldWeight in 1149, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1149)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

In this article, we examine some of the proposals which have dealt with the problems in cataloging in 2 different technological contexts: printed-card catalogs and online catalogs. We first look at some of the measures which attempted to deal with the 'crisis in cataloging' at the Library of Congress in the 1940s. Then we address some of the current problems in cataloging in the era of OPACs. In particular, we discuss the extent to which minimal-level cataloging, as defines by AACR and implemented in the OCLC database, works for maps. Our discussion is organized around 2 main groups of access points: controlled vocabulary data elements, including name data elements, and free-text data elements. In closing, we discuss prospects that the next generation of online catalogs uisng the Z39.50 protocol and SGML format might offer to minimal-level cataloging for maps

0.037119143 = product of:
  0.074238285 = sum of:
    0.022971334 = weight(_text_:library in 7910) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022971334 = score(doc=7910,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.17430481 = fieldWeight in 7910, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7910)
    0.051266953 = product of:
      0.10253391 = sum of:
        0.10253391 = weight(_text_:project in 7910) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10253391 = score(doc=7910,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.48465237 = fieldWeight in 7910, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7910)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Describes the technical aspects of a feasibility study to test a new concept in bibliographic control based on the manifestations of a work. Conventional catalogues are based on the main entry principle which follows from the concept that there should be 1 main entry for each work. The Bradford OPAC project, at Bradford University, UK, aimed to develop a new type of hierarchical bibliographic record structure to cope with the problem of applying the main entry principle to multiple cataloguing records which are manisfestations of the same work. The project involved the storage of MARC data sets of bibliographic records, taken from the Bradford University Library OPAC and the OCLC WorldCat database, in a relational database (MS Access) on a PC. This was then used for an experimental Windows based OPAC, to evaluate the overall success of the idea and any problem areas identified with a view to a more substantial study. The project also aimed to test whether intelligent and responsive software, using a graphic user interface and based on sets of manifestations, could provide a better route to information than a display based on a single work

0.035046883 = product of:
  0.070093766 = sum of:
    0.030628446 = weight(_text_:library in 10) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030628446 = score(doc=10,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 10, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=10)
    0.039465316 = product of:
      0.07893063 = sum of:
        0.07893063 = weight(_text_:project in 10) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07893063 = score(doc=10,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.37308553 = fieldWeight in 10, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=10)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

A discussion document produced following a meeting the Users of Book Industry Standards (UBIS) Bibliographic Standards Working Group at the University of London as part of a project to consider the Survey on the use of UK-MARC by Russell Sweeney published in 1991 by the British Library National Bibliographic Service. Considers the suitability, or otherwise, of the UKMARC format for use in OPACs. Summarizes the issues involved, discussing: the UKMARC exchange format, tagging and coding structure (record complexity, analytical entries, non filing indicators), data content (statements of responsibility, main versus added entry) and records standards

0.011485667 = product of:
  0.045942668 = sum of:
    0.045942668 = weight(_text_:library in 131) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045942668 = score(doc=131,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.34860963 = fieldWeight in 131, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=131)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Argues that in library cataloguing and for optional functionality of bibliographic records the indexing of fields and subfields should follow a uniform approach. This would maintain effectiveness in searching, retrieval and display of bibliographic information both within systems and between systems. However, a review of different postings to the AUTOCAT and USMARC discussion lists indicates that the indexing and tagging of cataloguing data do not, at present, follow a consistent approach in online library systems. If the rationale of cataloguing principles is to bring uniformity in bibliographic description and effectiveness in access, they should also address the question of uniform approaches to the indexing of cataloguing data. In this context and in terms of the identification and handling of data elements, cataloguing standards (codes, MARC formats and the Z39.50 standard) should be brought closer, in that they should provide guidelines for the designation of data elements for machine readable records

Source

Library review. 46(1997) no.5, S.339-343

0.010828791 = product of:
  0.043315165 = sum of:
    0.043315165 = weight(_text_:library in 3827) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.043315165 = score(doc=3827,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.32867232 = fieldWeight in 3827, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3827)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Analytical references are needed in online library catalogues in order to provide volume specific author and title access to volumes in monographic series that have been catalogues as periodicals. Demonstrates how Oregon Health Science University Library has used the MARC bibliographic format to provide a record consisting almost entirely of indexed access points, in essence, many cross references assembled into one record, all pointing to a serial. Further proposes that AACR2 rules 13.2A and 21.30M1 be extended to prescribe analytical added entries as well as analytical references

0.0067907665 = product of:
  0.027163066 = sum of:
    0.027163066 = product of:
      0.054326132 = sum of:
        0.054326132 = weight(_text_:22 in 7234) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054326132 = score(doc=7234,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 7234, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7234)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Cataloguing Australia. 22(1996) nos.1/2, S.21-25

0.006699973 = product of:
  0.026799891 = sum of:
    0.026799891 = weight(_text_:library in 4427) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026799891 = score(doc=4427,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.20335563 = fieldWeight in 4427, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4427)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Describes the major changes that have taken place in technical services in school libraries since 1967; cataloguing principles and practices, from earlier codes to AACR2; types of materials acquired, catalogued and processed, from mainly hardback books to a variety of audiovisual materials including CD-ROMs and videodiscs; and automation, which has allowed many school libraries to take advantage of shared cataloguing and to provide more standardized bibliographic control of library materials

0.006699973 = product of:
  0.026799891 = sum of:
    0.026799891 = weight(_text_:library in 3018) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026799891 = score(doc=3018,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.20335563 = fieldWeight in 3018, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3018)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Library review. 46(1997) no.5, S.328-338

0.0059419204 = product of:
  0.023767682 = sum of:
    0.023767682 = product of:
      0.047535364 = sum of:
        0.047535364 = weight(_text_:22 in 5162) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047535364 = score(doc=5162,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5162, 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=5162)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) no.1, S.3-28

0.004785695 = product of:
  0.01914278 = sum of:
    0.01914278 = weight(_text_:library in 908) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01914278 = score(doc=908,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.14525402 = fieldWeight in 908, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=908)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Library resources and technical services. 41(1997) no.2, S.79-100