Search (68 results, page 1 of 4)

  • × language_ss:"e"
  • × theme_ss:"Formalerschließung"
  • × type_ss:"el"
  1. O'Neill, E.T.: OCLC's experience identifying and using works (2004) 0.02 
    0.022234797 = product of:
  0.08893919 = sum of:
    0.021653436 = weight(_text_:und in 2459) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021653436 = score(doc=2459,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.33931053 = fieldWeight in 2459, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2459)
    0.017958641 = weight(_text_:der in 2459) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017958641 = score(doc=2459,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06431698 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.27922085 = fieldWeight in 2459, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2459)
    0.021653436 = weight(_text_:und in 2459) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021653436 = score(doc=2459,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.33931053 = fieldWeight in 2459, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2459)
    0.019517547 = weight(_text_:des in 2459) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019517547 = score(doc=2459,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.079736836 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.24477452 = fieldWeight in 2459, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2459)
    0.0081561245 = weight(_text_:in in 2459) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0081561245 = score(doc=2459,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.2082456 = fieldWeight in 2459, 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=2459)
  0.25 = coord(5/20)
    Content
    Beitrag anlässlich des FRBR-Workshops für Expertengruppenmitglieder am 8. und 9. Juli 2004 in Der Deutschen Bibliothek mit der Zielsetzung: Die Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) haben seit ihrer Veröffentlichung 1998 durch die IFLA die bibliothekarische Diskussion befruchtet. Was verbirgt sich hinter den FRBR? Welche Auswirkungen hat dieses Modell, das Beziehungen zwischen Entitäten darstellt, auf Regelwerke, Normdateien, Formate, Online-Kataloge und andere Bereiche? Welche Erfahrungen sind international bereits mit den FRBR gesammelt worden? Können wir die FRBR in Deutschland und Österreich nutzbringend in die Standardisierungsarbeit einbringen?
  2. Tillett, B.: What is FRBR (Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records)? (2004) 0.02 
    0.022234797 = product of:
  0.08893919 = sum of:
    0.021653436 = weight(_text_:und in 2484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021653436 = score(doc=2484,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.33931053 = fieldWeight in 2484, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2484)
    0.017958641 = weight(_text_:der in 2484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017958641 = score(doc=2484,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06431698 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.27922085 = fieldWeight in 2484, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2484)
    0.021653436 = weight(_text_:und in 2484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021653436 = score(doc=2484,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.33931053 = fieldWeight in 2484, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2484)
    0.019517547 = weight(_text_:des in 2484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019517547 = score(doc=2484,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.079736836 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.24477452 = fieldWeight in 2484, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2484)
    0.0081561245 = weight(_text_:in in 2484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0081561245 = score(doc=2484,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.2082456 = fieldWeight in 2484, 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=2484)
  0.25 = coord(5/20)
    Content
    Beitrag anlässlich des FRBR-Workshops für Expertengruppenmitglieder am 8. und 9. Juli 2004 in Der Deutschen Bibliothek mit der Zielsetzung: Die Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) haben seit ihrer Veröffentlichung 1998 durch die IFLA die bibliothekarische Diskussion befruchtet. Was verbirgt sich hinter den FRBR? Welche Auswirkungen hat dieses Modell, das Beziehungen zwischen Entitäten darstellt, auf Regelwerke, Normdateien, Formate, Online-Kataloge und andere Bereiche? Welche Erfahrungen sind international bereits mit den FRBR gesammelt worden? Können wir die FRBR in Deutschland und Österreich nutzbringend in die Standardisierungsarbeit einbringen?
  3. RDA Toolkit (3) : Oktober 2017 (2017) 0.02 
    0.02151913 = product of:
  0.08607652 = sum of:
    0.015627023 = weight(_text_:und in 3994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015627023 = score(doc=3994,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.24487628 = fieldWeight in 3994, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3994)
    0.022448301 = weight(_text_:der in 3994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022448301 = score(doc=3994,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.06431698 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.34902605 = fieldWeight in 3994, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3994)
    0.015627023 = weight(_text_:und in 3994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015627023 = score(doc=3994,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.24487628 = fieldWeight in 3994, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3994)
    0.0272766 = weight(_text_:des in 3994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0272766 = score(doc=3994,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.079736836 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.3420828 = fieldWeight in 3994, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3994)
    0.005097578 = weight(_text_:in in 3994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005097578 = score(doc=3994,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.1301535 = fieldWeight in 3994, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3994)
  0.25 = coord(5/20)
    Abstract
    Am 10. Oktober 2017 ist das neue Release des RDA Toolkits erschienen. Aufgrund des 3R-Projekts (RDA Toolkit Restruction and Redesign Project) gab es keine inhaltlichen Änderungen am Regelwerkstext. Es wurden ausschließlich Änderungen an den D-A-CH vorgenommen, die in der Änderungsdokumentation im RDA-Info-Wiki<https://wiki.dnb.de/x/1hLSBg> aufgelistet sind. Die Gesamtübersicht der D-A-CH nach Kapiteln finden Sie im RDA Toolkit unter dem Reiter "Ressourcen". Wir möchten daran erinnern, dass für die Anwendung von RDA im deutschsprachigen Raum jeweils der deutsche Text maßgeblich ist. Im Juni 2018 wird das RDA Toolkit einen Relaunch erfahren und mit einer neuen Oberfläche erscheinen. Dieser beinhaltet ein Redesign der Toolkit-Oberfläche und die inhaltliche Anpassung des Standards RDA an das Library Reference Model (IFLA LRM) sowie die künftige stärkere Ausrichtung auf die aktuellen technischen Möglichkeiten durch den sogenannten 4-Fold-Path. Zunächst wird im Juni 2018 die englische Originalausgabe der RDA in der neuen Form erscheinen. Alle Übersetzungen werden in einer Übergangszeit angepasst. Hierfür wird die alte Version des RDA Toolkit für ein weiteres Jahr zur Verfügung gestellt. Der Stand Oktober 2017 der deutschen Ausgabe und die D-A-CH-Anwendungsrichtlinien bleiben bis zur Anpassung eingefroren. Im geplanten Dezember-Release des RDA Toolkit wird es keine Änderungen für die deutsche Ausgabe und die D-A-CH-Anwendungsrichtlinien geben. [Inetbib vom 11.10.2017]
  4. RDA Toolkit (2) : August 2017 (2017) 0.02 
    0.02044606 = product of:
  0.08178424 = sum of:
    0.016240077 = weight(_text_:und in 3995) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016240077 = score(doc=3995,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.2544829 = fieldWeight in 3995, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3995)
    0.016496068 = weight(_text_:der in 3995) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016496068 = score(doc=3995,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06431698 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.25648075 = fieldWeight in 3995, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3995)
    0.016240077 = weight(_text_:und in 3995) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016240077 = score(doc=3995,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.2544829 = fieldWeight in 3995, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3995)
    0.029276319 = weight(_text_:des in 3995) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029276319 = score(doc=3995,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.079736836 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.36716178 = fieldWeight in 3995, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3995)
    0.003531705 = weight(_text_:in in 3995) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.003531705 = score(doc=3995,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.09017298 = fieldWeight in 3995, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3995)
  0.25 = coord(5/20)
    Abstract
    Am 8. August 2017 ist das neue Release des RDA Toolkits<http://www.rdatoolkit.org/august2017release> erschienen. Mit diesem Release ist die deutsche Übersetzung auf demselben Stand wie die englische Originalausgabe vom April 2017. Alle Änderungen aus dem Proposalverfahren 2016 und auch aus den Fast Tracks (für kleinere Änderungen) sind eingearbeitet und übersetzt. Ebenfalls aktualisiert wurden Glossar und RDA Registry<http://www.rdaregistry.info/>. Die deutsche Übersetzung ist im Zeitplan des 3R-Projekts (RDA Toolkit Restructure and Redesign Projekt). Alle anderen Übersetzungen des RDA Toolkits werden später im Jahr folgen. Die Änderungsdokumentation für das August-Release des RDA Toolkit finden Sie im RDA-Info-Wiki<https://wiki.dnb.de/x/3xLSBg>. Aktualisiert wurden auch die von der Fachgruppe Erschließung (FG E) kooperativ erarbeiteten Anwendungsrichtlinien für den deutschsprachigen Raum (D-A-CH). Diese sind auch in Französisch abrufbar. Eine Gesamtübersicht der D-A-CH AWR pro Kapitel ist im RDA Toolkit unter dem Reiter "Ressourcen". Die Änderungsdokumentation der D-A-CH AWR finden Sie ebenfalls im RDA-Info-Wiki.<https://wiki.dnb.de/x/1hLSBg>. [Inetbib vom 09.08.2017].
  5. RDA Toolkit (4) : Dezember 2017 (2017) 0.02 
    0.020273242 = product of:
  0.08109297 = sum of:
    0.013977233 = weight(_text_:und in 4283) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013977233 = score(doc=4283,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.219024 = fieldWeight in 4283, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4283)
    0.016798772 = weight(_text_:der in 4283) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016798772 = score(doc=4283,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.06431698 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.2611872 = fieldWeight in 4283, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4283)
    0.013977233 = weight(_text_:und in 4283) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013977233 = score(doc=4283,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.219024 = fieldWeight in 4283, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4283)
    0.029276319 = weight(_text_:des in 4283) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029276319 = score(doc=4283,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.079736836 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.36716178 = fieldWeight in 4283, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4283)
    0.00706341 = weight(_text_:in in 4283) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00706341 = score(doc=4283,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 4283, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4283)
  0.25 = coord(5/20)
    Abstract
    Am 12. Dezember 2017 ist das neue Release des RDA Toolkits erschienen. Dabei gab es, aufgrund des 3R-Projekts (RDA Toolkit Restruction and Redesign Project), keine inhaltlichen Änderungen am RDA-Text. Es wurden ausschließlich die Übersetzungen in finnischer und französischer Sprache, ebenso wie die dazugehörigen Policy statements, aktualisiert. Für den deutschsprachigen Raum wurden in der Übersetzung zwei Beziehungskennzeichnungen geändert: Im Anhang I.2.2 wurde die Änderung von "Sponsor" zu "Träger" wieder rückgängig gemacht. In Anhang K.2.3 wurde "Sponsor" zu "Person als Sponsor" geändert. Außerdem wurde die Übersetzung der Anwendungsrichtlinien (D-A-CH AWR) ins Französische aktualisiert. Dies ist das vorletzte Release vor dem Rollout des neuen Toolkits. Das letzte Release im Januar/Februar 2018 wird die norwegische Übersetzung enthalten. Im Juni 2018 wird das RDA Toolkit ein Relaunch erfahren und mit einer neuen Oberfläche erscheinen. Dieser beinhaltet ein Redesign der Toolkit-Oberfläche und die inhaltliche Anpassung des Standards RDA an das Library Reference Model (IFLA LRM) sowie die künftige stärkere Ausrichtung auf die aktuellen technischen Möglichkeiten. Zunächst wird im Juni 2018 die englische Originalausgabe der RDA in der neuen Form erscheinen. Alle Übersetzungen werden in einer Übergangszeit angepasst. Hierfür wird die alte Version des RDA Toolkit für ein weiteres Jahr zur Verfügung gestellt. Der Stand Dezember 2017 der deutschen Ausgabe und die D-A-CH-Anwendungsrichtlinien bleiben bis zur Anpassung eingefroren. Nähere Information zum Rollout finden Sie unter dem folgenden Link<http://www.rdatoolkit.org/3Rproject/SR3>. [Inetbib vom 13.12.2017]
    "das RDA Steering Committee (RSC) hat eine Verlautbarung<http://www.rda-rsc.org/sites/all/files/RSC-Chair-19.pdf> zum 3R Project und dem Release des neuen RDA Toolkits am 13. Juni 2018 herausgegeben. Außerdem wurde ein neuer Post zum Projekt auf dem RDA Toolkit Blog veröffentlicht "What to Expect from the RDA Toolkit beta site"<http://www.rdatoolkit.org/3Rproject/Beta>. Die deutsche Übersetzung folgt in Kürze auf dem RDA-Info-Wiki<https://wiki.dnb.de/display/RDAINFO/RDA-Info>. Für den deutschsprachigen Raum wird das Thema im Rahmen des Deutschen Bibliothekartags in Berlin im Treffpunkt Standardisierung am Freitag, den 15. Juni aufgegriffen. Die durch das 3R Project entstandenen Anpassungsarbeiten für den DACH-Raum werden im Rahmen eines 3R-DACH-Projekts<https://wiki.dnb.de/x/v5jpBw> in den Fachgruppen des Standardisierungsausschusses durchgeführt. Für die praktische Arbeit ändert sich bis zur Durchführung von Anpassungsschulungen nichts. Basis für die Erschließung bleibt bis dahin die aktuelle Version des RDA Toolkits in deutscher Sprache." [Mail R. Behrens an Inetbib vom 11.06.2018].
  6. RDA Toolkit (1) (2017) 0.02 
    0.01884748 = product of:
  0.07538992 = sum of:
    0.015627023 = weight(_text_:und in 3996) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015627023 = score(doc=3996,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.24487628 = fieldWeight in 3996, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3996)
    0.020998465 = weight(_text_:der in 3996) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020998465 = score(doc=3996,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.06431698 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.326484 = fieldWeight in 3996, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3996)
    0.015627023 = weight(_text_:und in 3996) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015627023 = score(doc=3996,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.24487628 = fieldWeight in 3996, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3996)
    0.017251236 = weight(_text_:des in 3996) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017251236 = score(doc=3996,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.079736836 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.21635216 = fieldWeight in 3996, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3996)
    0.005886175 = weight(_text_:in in 3996) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005886175 = score(doc=3996,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.15028831 = fieldWeight in 3996, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3996)
  0.25 = coord(5/20)
    Abstract
    Am 14. Februar 2017 ist das neue Release des RDA Toolkits<http://www.rdatoolkit.org/development/February2017release> erschienen. Das Release enthält im englischen Text alle Änderungen aus dem Fast-Track-Verfahren RSC/Sec/6<http://www.rda-rsc.org/sites/all/files/RSC-Sec-6.pdf>. Ebenso enthalten sind die Updates der LC-PCC PS (Library of Congress-Program for Cooperative Cataloging Policy Statements) und der MLA Best Practices. Neu aufgenommen wurden die Policy Statements der Library and Archives Canada in Kooperation mit der Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec. Diese sind sowohl im Register als auch im Text über ein Icon (dunkel violett) mit den Buchstaben LAC/BAC-BAnQ ansteuerbar. Ab sofort ist es möglich sich auch die Policy Statements in einer zweisprachigen Ansicht anzeigen zu lassen, dazu wurde die Funktion Select Language und Dual View in der Symbolliste unter dem Reiter "Ressourcen" eingefügt. Im deutschen Text wurden ausschließlich Änderungen an den Anwendungsrichtlinien für den deutschsprachigen Raum (D-A-CH) eingearbeitet. Die dazugehörige Übersicht (Kurz- bzw. Langversion) finden Sie im RDA-Info-Wiki<https://wiki.dnb.de/x/1hLSBg>. Mitte April 2017 wird das nächste Release des RDA Toolkit erscheinen, eingearbeitet werden die verabschiedeten Proposals, die im November 2016 vom RDA Steering Committee (RSC) beschlossen wurden. Die Umsetzung der Änderungen in der deutschen Übersetzung aus den Fast-Track-Dokumenten RSC/Sec/4 und RSC/Sec/5 und RSC/Sec/6 sind für den August 2017 geplant.
  7. Riva, P.; Zumer, M.: Introducing the FRBR library reference model (2015) 0.01 
    0.012781498 = product of:
  0.051125992 = sum of:
    0.013977233 = weight(_text_:und in 2094) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013977233 = score(doc=2094,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.219024 = fieldWeight in 2094, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2094)
    0.0063493387 = weight(_text_:der in 2094) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0063493387 = score(doc=2094,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06431698 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.09871948 = fieldWeight in 2094, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2094)
    0.013977233 = weight(_text_:und in 2094) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013977233 = score(doc=2094,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.219024 = fieldWeight in 2094, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2094)
    0.009758773 = weight(_text_:des in 2094) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009758773 = score(doc=2094,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.079736836 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.12238726 = fieldWeight in 2094, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2094)
    0.00706341 = weight(_text_:in in 2094) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00706341 = score(doc=2094,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 2094, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2094)
  0.25 = coord(5/20)
    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."
  8. Tillett, B.: ¬The FRBR model : Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (2002) 0.01 
    0.009863477 = product of:
  0.065756515 = sum of:
    0.015627023 = weight(_text_:und in 759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015627023 = score(doc=759,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.24487628 = fieldWeight in 759, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=759)
    0.015627023 = weight(_text_:und in 759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015627023 = score(doc=759,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.24487628 = fieldWeight in 759, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=759)
    0.034502473 = weight(_text_:des in 759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034502473 = score(doc=759,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.079736836 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.43270433 = fieldWeight in 759, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=759)
  0.15 = coord(3/20)
    Abstract
    Überblick über die Ideen und Ziele des FRBR-Ansatzes
    Content
    Beitrag des Workshops on Authority Control among Chinese, Korean and Japanese Languages (CJK Authority 3), March 14-18, 2002, Karuizawa, Tokyo, Kyoto
  9. Delsey, T.: ¬The logical structure of the Anglo-American cataloguing rules : Drafted for the Joint Steering Committee for Revision of AACR by Tom Delsey ... (1998) 0.01 
    0.0055710333 = product of:
  0.03714022 = sum of:
    0.015627023 = weight(_text_:und in 3005) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015627023 = score(doc=3005,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.24487628 = fieldWeight in 3005, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3005)
    0.015627023 = weight(_text_:und in 3005) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015627023 = score(doc=3005,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06381599 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.24487628 = fieldWeight in 3005, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3005)
    0.005886175 = weight(_text_:in in 3005) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005886175 = score(doc=3005,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.15028831 = fieldWeight in 3005, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3005)
  0.15 = coord(3/20)
    Footnote
    Rez. in: ZfBB 47(2000) H.1, S.102-105 (H. Wiese)
    Source
    http://www.nlc-bnc.ca/jsc/aacr.pdf und http://www.nlc-bnc.ca/jsc/aacr2.pdf
  10. RDA Toolkit (5 - Juni 2018) (2018) 0.01 
    0.0051764026 = product of:
  0.051764026 = sum of:
    0.017958641 = weight(_text_:der in 3993) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017958641 = score(doc=3993,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06431698 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.27922085 = fieldWeight in 3993, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3993)
    0.033805385 = weight(_text_:des in 3993) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033805385 = score(doc=3993,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.079736836 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.42396194 = fieldWeight in 3993, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3993)
  0.1 = coord(2/20)
    Abstract
    "gestern Abend wurde die beta Version des neuen RDA-Toolkits<http://beta.rdatoolkit.org/rda.web/> veröffentlicht. Die Veröffentlichung der Beta-Site ist ein wichtiger Meilenstein innerhalb des RDA Toolkit Restructure and Redesign Project, bedeutet aber nicht den Abschluss des 3R-Projekts. Eine vollständige Beschreibung dessen, was auf der Beta-Site enthalten ist oder nicht, finden Sie im RDA-Info-Wiki<https://wiki.dnb.de/x/oQNXC>." [Inetbib vom 14.06.2018].
  11. Münnich, M.: German authority control and work (1996) 0.00 
    0.003046333 = product of:
  0.03046333 = sum of:
    0.022222685 = weight(_text_:der in 4118) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022222685 = score(doc=4118,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06431698 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.34551817 = fieldWeight in 4118, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4118)
    0.008240645 = weight(_text_:in in 4118) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008240645 = score(doc=4118,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.21040362 = fieldWeight in 4118, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4118)
  0.1 = coord(2/20)
    Footnote
    Referat auf der OCLC-Konferenz 'Authority control in the 21st century'
  12. Danskin, A.: RDA implementation and application : British Library (2014) 0.00 
    0.0026176993 = product of:
  0.026176993 = sum of:
    0.019517547 = weight(_text_:des in 1562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019517547 = score(doc=1562,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.079736836 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.24477452 = fieldWeight in 1562, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1562)
    0.006659447 = weight(_text_:in in 1562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006659447 = score(doc=1562,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.17003182 = fieldWeight in 1562, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1562)
  0.1 = coord(2/20)
    Abstract
    The British Library implemented the new international cataloguing standard RDA in April 2013. The paper describes the reasons for the change, the project organization, the necessary adaptations to the systems and the training programs. Altogether, 227 staff were trained. Productivity levels by now are comparable with the levels for AACR2. However, there was a tendency to spend too much time on authority control.
    Content
    Beitrag als ausgearbeitete Form eines Vortrages während des 103. Deutschen Bibliothekartages in Bremen. Vgl.: https://www.o-bib.de/article/view/2014H1S187-191.
  13. Marcum, D.B.: ¬The future of cataloging (2005) 0.00 
    0.0019632746 = product of:
  0.019632746 = sum of:
    0.014638159 = weight(_text_:des in 1086) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014638159 = score(doc=1086,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.079736836 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.18358089 = fieldWeight in 1086, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.7693076 = idf(docFreq=7536, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1086)
    0.0049945856 = weight(_text_:in in 1086) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0049945856 = score(doc=1086,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.12752387 = fieldWeight in 1086, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1086)
  0.1 = coord(2/20)
    Abstract
    This thought piece on the future of cataloging is long on musings and short on predictions. But that isn't to denigrate it, only to clarify it's role given the possible connotations of the title. Rather than coming up with solutions or predictions, Marcum ponders the proper role of cataloging in a Google age. Marcum cites the Google project to digitize much or all of the contents of a selected set of major research libraries as evidence that the world of cataloging is changing dramatically, and she briefly identifies ways in which the Library of Congress is responding to this new environment. But, Marcum cautions, "the future of cataloging is not something that the Library of Congress, or even the small library group with which we will meet, can or expects to resolve alone." She then poses some specific questions that should be considered, including how we can massively change our current MARC/AACR2 system without creating chaos
    Footnote
    Beitrag des "EBSCO Leadership Seminar, Boston, 16 January 2005"
  14. Delsey, T.: ¬The Making of RDA (2016) 0.00 
    0.001960032 = product of:
  0.019600319 = sum of:
    0.007897133 = weight(_text_:in in 2946) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007897133 = score(doc=2946,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.20163295 = fieldWeight in 2946, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2946)
    0.011703186 = product of:
      0.023406371 = sum of:
        0.023406371 = weight(_text_:22 in 2946) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023406371 = score(doc=2946,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10082839 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02879306 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2946, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2946)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.1 = coord(2/20)
    Abstract
    The author revisits the development of RDA from its inception in 2005 through to its initial release in 2010. The development effort is set in the context of an evolving digital environment that was transforming both the production and dissemination of information resources and the technologies used to create, store, and access data describing those resources. The author examines the interplay between strategic commitments to align RDA with new conceptual models, emerging database structures, and metadata developments in allied communities, on the one hand, and compatibility with AACR2 legacy databases on the other. Aspects of the development effort examined include the structuring of RDA as a resource description language, organizing the new standard as a working tool, and refining guidelines and instructions for recording RDA data.
    Date
    17. 5.2016 19:22:40
    Footnote
    Beitrag in einem Themenheft zu RDA.
  15. Genetasio, G.: ¬The International Cataloguing Principles and their future", in: JLIS.it 3/1 (2012) (2012) 0.00 
    0.0016587417 = product of:
  0.016587418 = sum of:
    0.009524008 = weight(_text_:der in 2625) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009524008 = score(doc=2625,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06431698 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.14807922 = fieldWeight in 2625, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2625)
    0.00706341 = weight(_text_:in in 2625) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00706341 = score(doc=2625,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 2625, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2625)
  0.1 = coord(2/20)
    Abstract
    The article aims to provide an update on the 2009 Statement of International Cataloguing Principles (ICP) and on the status of work on the Statement by the IFLA Cataloguing Section. The article begins with a summary of the drafting process of the ICP by the IME ICC, International Meeting of Experts on an International Cataloguing Code, focusing in particular on the first meeting (IME ICC1) and on the earlier drafts of the 2009 Statement. It then analyzes both the major innovations and the unsatisfactory aspects of the ICP. Finally, it explains and comments on the recent documents by the IFLA Cataloguing Section relating to the ICP, which express their intention to revise the Statement and to verify the convenience of drawing up an international cataloguing code. The latter intention is considered in detail and criticized by the author in the light of the recent publication of the RDA, Resource Description and Access. The article is complemented by an updated bibliography on the ICP.
    Theme
    Geschichte der Kataloge
  16. Dousa, T.M.: E. Wyndham Hulme's classification of the attributes of books : On an early model of a core bibliographical entity (2017) 0.00 
    0.0012116589 = product of:
  0.012116589 = sum of:
    0.0063493387 = weight(_text_:der in 3859) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0063493387 = score(doc=3859,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06431698 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.09871948 = fieldWeight in 3859, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3859)
    0.0057672504 = weight(_text_:in in 3859) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0057672504 = score(doc=3859,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.14725187 = fieldWeight in 3859, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3859)
  0.1 = coord(2/20)
    Abstract
    Modelling bibliographical entities is a prominent activity within knowledge organization today. Current models of bibliographic entities, such as Functional Requirements for Bibliographical Records (FRBR) and the Bibliographic Framework (BIBFRAME), take inspiration from data - modelling methods developed by computer scientists from the mid - 1970s on. Thus, it would seem that the modelling of bibliographic entities is an activity of very recent vintage. However, it is possible to find examples of bibliographical models from earlier periods of knowledge organization. The purpose of this paper is to draw attention to one such model, outlined by the early 20th - century British classification theorist E. Wyndham Hulme in his essay on "Principles of Book Classification" (1911 - 1912). There, Hulme set forth a classification of various attributes by which books can conceivably be classified. These he first divided into accidental and inseparable attributes. Accidental attributes were subdivided into edition - level and copy - level attributes and inseparable attitudes, into physical and non - physical attributes. Comparison of Hulme's classification of attributes with those of FRBR and BIBFRAME 2.0 reveals that the different classes of attributes in Hulme's classification correspond to groups of attributes associated with different bibliographical entities in those models. These later models assume the existence of different bibliographic entities in an abstraction hierarchy among which attributes are distributed, whereas Hulme posited only a single entity - the book - , whose various aspects he clustered into different classes of attributes. Thus, Hulme's model offers an interesting alternative to current assumptions about how to conceptualize the relationship between attributes and entities in the bibliographical universe.
    Content
    Beitrag bei: NASKO 2017: Visualizing Knowledge Organization: Bringing Focus to Abstract Realities. The sixth North American Symposium on Knowledge Organization (NASKO 2017), June 15-16, 2017, in Champaign, IL, USA.
    Theme
    Geschichte der Kataloge
  17. Report on the future of bibliographic control : draft for public comment (2007) 0.00 
    0.0011825415 = product of:
  0.011825414 = sum of:
    0.004762004 = weight(_text_:der in 1271) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004762004 = score(doc=1271,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06431698 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.07403961 = fieldWeight in 1271, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1271)
    0.00706341 = weight(_text_:in in 1271) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00706341 = score(doc=1271,freq=32.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 1271, product of:
          5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
            32.0 = termFreq=32.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1271)
  0.1 = coord(2/20)
    Abstract
    The future of bibliographic control will be collaborative, decentralized, international in scope, and Web-based. Its realization will occur in cooperation with the private sector, and with the active collaboration of library users. Data will be gathered from multiple sources; change will happen quickly; and bibliographic control will be dynamic, not static. The underlying technology that makes this future possible and necessary-the World Wide Web-is now almost two decades old. Libraries must continue the transition to this future without delay in order to retain their relevance as information providers. The Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control encourages the library community to take a thoughtful and coordinated approach to effecting significant changes in bibliographic control. Such an approach will call for leadership that is neither unitary nor centralized. Nor will the responsibility to provide such leadership fall solely to the Library of Congress (LC). That said, the Working Group recognizes that LC plays a unique role in the library community of the United States, and the directions that LC takes have great impact on all libraries. We also recognize that there are many other institutions and organizations that have the expertise and the capacity to play significant roles in the bibliographic future. Wherever possible, those institutions must step forward and take responsibility for assisting with navigating the transition and for playing appropriate ongoing roles after that transition is complete. To achieve the goals set out in this document, we must look beyond individual libraries to a system wide deployment of resources. We must realize efficiencies in order to be able to reallocate resources from certain lower-value components of the bibliographic control ecosystem into other higher-value components of that same ecosystem. The recommendations in this report are directed at a number of parties, indicated either by their common initialism (e.g., "LC" for Library of Congress, "PCC" for Program for Cooperative Cataloging) or by their general category (e.g., "Publishers," "National Libraries"). When the recommendation is addressed to "All," it is intended for the library community as a whole and its close collaborators.
    The Library of Congress must begin by prioritizing the recommendations that are directed in whole or in part at LC. Some define tasks that can be achieved immediately and with moderate effort; others will require analysis and planning that will have to be coordinated broadly and carefully. The Working Group has consciously not associated time frames with any of its recommendations. The recommendations fall into five general areas: 1. Increase the efficiency of bibliographic production for all libraries through increased cooperation and increased sharing of bibliographic records, and by maximizing the use of data produced throughout the entire "supply chain" for information resources. 2. Transfer effort into higher-value activity. In particular, expand the possibilities for knowledge creation by "exposing" rare and unique materials held by libraries that are currently hidden from view and, thus, underused. 3. Position our technology for the future by recognizing that the World Wide Web is both our technology platform and the appropriate platform for the delivery of our standards. Recognize that people are not the only users of the data we produce in the name of bibliographic control, but so too are machine applications that interact with those data in a variety of ways. 4. Position our community for the future by facilitating the incorporation of evaluative and other user-supplied information into our resource descriptions. Work to realize the potential of the FRBR framework for revealing and capitalizing on the various relationships that exist among information resources. 5. Strengthen the library profession through education and the development of metrics that will inform decision-making now and in the future. The Working Group intends what follows to serve as a broad blueprint for the Library of Congress and its colleagues in the library and information technology communities for extending and promoting access to information resources.
    Content
    Vgl. dazu auch die Forderungen der Open Knowledge Foundation (OKF), Katalogdaten grundsätzlich zur weiteren Nutzung freizugeben, unter: http://blog.wikimedia.de/2007/12/15/open-knowledge-foundation-fordert-freie-katalogdaten/.
  18. BIBFRAME Relationships (2014) 0.00 
    7.9366734E-4 = product of:
  0.015873346 = sum of:
    0.015873346 = weight(_text_:der in 8920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015873346 = score(doc=8920,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06431698 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.2467987 = fieldWeight in 8920, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=8920)
  0.05 = coord(1/20)
    Content
    Enthält tabellarische Übersichten der Relationen.
  19. Mapping ISBD elements to FRBR entity attributes and relationships (2004) 0.00 
    5.886175E-4 = product of:
  0.01177235 = sum of:
    0.01177235 = weight(_text_:in in 2370) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01177235 = score(doc=2370,freq=32.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.30057663 = fieldWeight in 2370, product of:
          5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
            32.0 = termFreq=32.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2370)
  0.05 = coord(1/20)
    Abstract
    Background The ISBD Review Group has been assessing the feasibility of aligning the terminology used in the texts of the International Standard Bibliographic Descriptions (ISBDs) with that used in the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR). However, the group has encountered difficulties in trying to achieve that alignment, owing in large part to the fact that the terms used in FRBR were defined in the context of an entityrelationship model conceived at a higher level of abstraction than the specifications for the ISBDs. While the entities defined in the FRBR model are clearly related to the elements forming an ISBD description, they are not necessarily congruent in all respects and the relationships are too complex to be conveyed through a simple substitution of terminology. Purpose and scope The table that follows is designed to clarify the relationship between the ISBDs and the FRBR model by mapping each of the elements specified in the ISBDs to its corresponding entity attribute or relationship as defined in the FRBR model. The mapping covers all elements specified in the outlines in the latest approved editions of the ISBDs as of July 2004. The elements analyzed comprise those listed in the outline of the ISBD(G) for areas 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, and 8, as weIl as elements specified for area 3 (the material or type of resource specific area) in the current editions of ISBD(CM), ISBD(CR), ISBD(ER), and ISBD(PM). The elements analyzed in area 7 (the note area) cover specific types of notes identified in the individual ISBDs.
  20. Le Boeuf, P.; Riva, P.; Zumer, M.: FRBR - Library Reference Model : draft for World-Wide Review (2016) 0.00 
    5.8566703E-4 = product of:
  0.011713341 = sum of:
    0.011713341 = weight(_text_:in in 2881) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011713341 = score(doc=2881,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.039165888 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02879306 = queryNorm
        0.29906997 = fieldWeight in 2881, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2881)
  0.05 = coord(1/20)
    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.

Authors

Years

Types

  • a 32
  • n 6
  • p 3
  • r 2
  • More… Less…

Themes