Search (74 results, page 2 of 4)

0.0025503114 = product of:
  0.015301868 = sum of:
    0.015301868 = weight(_text_:in in 279) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015301868 = score(doc=279,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.2576908 = fieldWeight in 279, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=279)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

This study examines the interrelationship of the rules on parallel title in AACR2. What emerges from the analysis are two principles that were utilized in the codification of the rules: (1) a principle of interrelationship (i.e. transcribing a data element in its relationship to other data elements); and (2) a principle of structured format (i.e. transcribing a data element in a prescribed order). A graphic representation of the possible combinations and positions of the data elements of descriptions in the title and statement of responsibility area (Area 1) shows that the present rules do not ensure consistency in bibliographic recording.

0.0025241538 = product of:
  0.015144923 = sum of:
    0.015144923 = weight(_text_:in in 4619) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015144923 = score(doc=4619,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.25504774 = fieldWeight in 4619, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4619)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Source

Hierarchical relationships in bibliographic records, INTERMARC software subgroup seminar 4, Essen, 25.3.-27.3.1981

0.0023797948 = product of:
  0.014278769 = sum of:
    0.014278769 = weight(_text_:in in 6166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014278769 = score(doc=6166,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.24046129 = fieldWeight in 6166, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6166)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

0.0023797948 = product of:
  0.014278769 = sum of:
    0.014278769 = weight(_text_:in in 8649) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014278769 = score(doc=8649,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.24046129 = fieldWeight in 8649, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8649)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Paper presented at the International Association of Sound Archives (IASA) Conference, Vienna, 1988, at the Cataloguing Committee's session. In making entries of edited audiovisual material there a two sets of rules in existence in West Germany both of which are described. Identifies 8 types of material for each of which there are prescribed cataloguing rules; the visual re-presentation for projection; film; multi-media; slide show with synchronised sound and commentary; sound recordings; group of games; and audiovisual material in microform.

0.0023797948 = product of:
  0.014278769 = sum of:
    0.014278769 = weight(_text_:in in 1187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014278769 = score(doc=1187,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.24046129 = fieldWeight in 1187, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1187)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

0.0023281053 = product of:
  0.013968632 = sum of:
    0.013968632 = weight(_text_:in in 343) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013968632 = score(doc=343,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.23523843 = fieldWeight in 343, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=343)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Bibliographic control does not differ in substance from one type of material to another. Therefore it is not possible to separate the bibliographic control of music materials entirely from the larger domain of bibliographic control activity. The literature of music librarianship is examined for relevant theoretical explanations. Specific problems of description and access are used to show that, in general, the requirements for bibliographic control of music fit neatly into the theoretical structure for all bibliographic control. The primary purpose of descriptive cataloging of musical objects is to identify and differentiate among objects in a library collection. Where the concept of responsibility is relevant, access is provided through the names of composers or performers. Systematic access is provided through co-equal facets: medium, manifestation, and form.

0.0023281053 = product of:
  0.013968632 = sum of:
    0.013968632 = weight(_text_:in in 344) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013968632 = score(doc=344,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.23523843 = fieldWeight in 344, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=344)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Traditional approaches to the concepts of "authorship" and "responsibility" of scientific and technical documents are examined in printed versions of selected abstracting services. The importance attributed to the work of the individual or the parent organization differs between discipline-oriented services developed for the most part by scientific and technical societies, and services announcing reports of government sponsored research developed by the U.S. Federal Government. These differences are linked to the contexts in which scientific and technical research are performed. Differences in approach which are apparent in printed sources may be obscured when databases are mounted for online searching and search vendors impose their own processing requirements on the bibliographic data.

0.0023281053 = product of:
  0.013968632 = sum of:
    0.013968632 = weight(_text_:in in 369) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013968632 = score(doc=369,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.23523843 = fieldWeight in 369, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=369)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

On-site newspaper cataloging in libraries, historical societies, newspaper publishers' offices and private collectors' homes in rural northcentral Pennsylvania created a host of challenges and rewards for project librarians of the Pennsylvania Newspaper Project. The experiences of the Penn State team in their quest to identify, inventory and catalog newspapers in a variety of unorthodox and exciting situations are shared in this article. The paper focuses on problems associated with identifying titles, linking titles, updating cataloging and gathering holdings data, and offers some solutions to those problems.

0.0023281053 = product of:
  0.013968632 = sum of:
    0.013968632 = weight(_text_:in in 437) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013968632 = score(doc=437,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.23523843 = fieldWeight in 437, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=437)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Bibliographic records for microcomputer software in the OCLC Online Union Catalog are evaluated primarily for the purpose of focusing catalogers' attention on selected record areas in need of more consistent treatment. The degree of cataloging inconsistency evident in these records is examined with respect to the application of rules and prescriptions embodied in AACR2 Chapter 9, the ALA Guidelines for cataloging microcomputer software, and the application of Library of Congress subject cataloging practice to these materials. A secondary purpose of this quantitative/qualitative study is to provide a general assessment of the overall composition of microcomputer software cataloging during this transition period between the use of available but disparate sources of descriptive cataloging guidance and their eventual consolidation in the future edition of AACR2.

0.0021034614 = product of:
  0.012620768 = sum of:
    0.012620768 = weight(_text_:in in 3605) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012620768 = score(doc=3605,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.21253976 = fieldWeight in 3605, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3605)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

The Indiana University at Bloomington Libraries have been responsible for the cataloguing of 3 major microform sets. Describes many of the problems and difficulties encountered in these cataloguing projects.

0.0020823204 = product of:
  0.012493922 = sum of:
    0.012493922 = weight(_text_:in in 327) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012493922 = score(doc=327,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.21040362 = fieldWeight in 327, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=327)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

In the last ten years, Cataloging in Publication (CIP) records have gained increasing acceptance and use in libraries, especially for cataloging purposes. Nevertheless, there is a general perception that the accuracy of CIP records can be further improved. Because improvement is only possible with more concrete information identifying specific problem areas, this study is designed to provide catalogers and cataloging managers more empirical data on the frequency and types of discrepancy between MARC CIP records and subsequent MARC LC records. This study differs from an earlier study which involved CIP records that appeared on the verso of the title page of publications. In addition, this study will make some observations regarding more effective use of the CIP records, primarily for cataloging purposes.

0.0020823204 = product of:
  0.012493922 = sum of:
    0.012493922 = weight(_text_:in in 433) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012493922 = score(doc=433,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.21040362 = fieldWeight in 433, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=433)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Searching and record creation in a total and integrated library system could be accomplished in a number of departments. Local organizational history will inevitably have an impact upon the placement of responsibility for these functions, but should not be the sole criterion. Several factors argue strongly for searching and record creation within the catalog department. Among these are the expertise of the catalog department in creating and maintaining bibliographic records, the increasingly similar methods of pre-order and pre-catalog searching, and the theories upon which total and integrated systems such as NOTIS are based.

0.0020823204 = product of:
  0.012493922 = sum of:
    0.012493922 = weight(_text_:in in 435) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012493922 = score(doc=435,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.21040362 = fieldWeight in 435, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=435)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

In cataloging, it is necessary to determine whether the item is monographic or serial in nature. Library of Congress rule interpretations have progressively restricted the types of publication which can be cataloged as serial. These interpretations have been, essentially, new rules. These new LC rules depart from past practice, and are not always consistently applied. Restricting the types of publication considered serial may work against efficient acquisition of materials, and confuse patron access, especially on automated in-house systems. Decisions made by major cataloging agencies and distributed via (inter)national bibliographic utilities may be accepted too readily in other libraries. The whole area of what is or is not serial needs to be rethought.

0.0020609628 = product of:
  0.012365777 = sum of:
    0.012365777 = weight(_text_:in in 1561) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012365777 = score(doc=1561,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.2082456 = fieldWeight in 1561, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1561)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Reviews the organisation of the work of cataloguing standardisation in France and in standards published or in preparation. French standards follow IFLA reommendations on rules for bibliographic descriptions and headings. Standardisation of formats is less developed; however MARC is gaininig ground as a national exchange format, whilst USMARC is also used by university and public libraries. French policy on cataloguing standards aims both to promote international exchange of biblio-graphic recordswhile respecting national access requirements, and to simplify cataloguing by promoting the use of medium-level bibliographic records.

0.0020609628 = product of:
  0.012365777 = sum of:
    0.012365777 = weight(_text_:in in 311) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012365777 = score(doc=311,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.2082456 = fieldWeight in 311, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=311)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

The method of integrating rules for nonbook materials with those for print materials in AACR2 is examined to see how well nonbook materials are handled and whether the treatment of print materials is affected. Both choice of entry rules and rules for description are examined to see whether their provisions are in accordance with the needs of users of these materials, and/or the patterns of publication and identification of these materials. Areas needing further research are identified.

0.0020609628 = product of:
  0.012365777 = sum of:
    0.012365777 = weight(_text_:in in 336) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012365777 = score(doc=336,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.2082456 = fieldWeight in 336, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=336)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to explore some of the implications of abandoning the main entry in online catalogs. The approach we take is to explore the consequences of deleting direct and indirect references to main entry in Chapter 21 in the second edition of the Anglo-American Calaloguing Rules (AACR2). Three classes of problematic rules result when this deletion is performed. First there are rules, which when converted, become awkward or non-sensical. Second there are rules which under conversion become overly complex. Third there are converted rules which cannot be easily operationalized.

0.0020609628 = product of:
  0.012365777 = sum of:
    0.012365777 = weight(_text_:in in 356) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012365777 = score(doc=356,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.2082456 = fieldWeight in 356, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=356)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

The rules for description in Harriman's Newspaper Cataloging Manual are compared to those found in Chapter 1 (General Rules for Description) and Chapter 12 (Serials) of AACR2, and the pertinent Library of Congress rule interpretations that have appeared in Cataloging Service Bulletin. Some of the differences among the documents, both major and minor, are discussed.

0.0020609628 = product of:
  0.012365777 = sum of:
    0.012365777 = weight(_text_:in in 359) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012365777 = score(doc=359,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.2082456 = fieldWeight in 359, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=359)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Chinese names have long been a problem for technical processing, cataloging, and bibliographic searching in the libraries. Comparing AACR1 and AACR2, each takes a different approach in dealing with Chinese names containing a non-Chinese given name. Catalogers have struggled with the problem, not always successfully, as reported in this article.

0.0020609628 = product of:
  0.012365777 = sum of:
    0.012365777 = weight(_text_:in in 399) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012365777 = score(doc=399,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.2082456 = fieldWeight in 399, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=399)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Automation and economic cutbacks are forcing many large libraries to alter traditional organizational structures. This paper describes the reorganization of technical and public service activities in the University of Illinois Library at Urbana-Champaign. The decentralization of original cataloging functions is examined, particularly as implemented in the Education and Social Science Library (ESSL), and the effect on management of original cataloging activities and cataloging norms is discussed.

0.0020609628 = product of:
  0.012365777 = sum of:
    0.012365777 = weight(_text_:in in 429) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012365777 = score(doc=429,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.2082456 = fieldWeight in 429, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=429)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Describes changes made in the workflow in Technical Services in the Eisenhower Library at Johns Hopkins University following the implementation of the NOTIS acquisitions system. A goal is to use the same bibliographic record for ordering and cataloging whenever possible. It is expected that the workflow of the Cataloging and Acquisitions Departments will be interdependent and evaluated on an ongoing basis.