Search (26 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × language_ss:"e"
  • × theme_ss:"Katalogfragen allgemein"
  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  1. Frâncu, V.: ¬An interpretation of the FRBR model (2004) 0.00
    0.0033085097 = product of:
      0.014888294 = sum of:
        0.0069203344 = product of:
          0.013840669 = sum of:
            0.013840669 = weight(_text_:web in 2647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.013840669 = score(doc=2647,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.14422815 = fieldWeight in 2647, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2647)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.007967959 = product of:
          0.015935918 = sum of:
            0.015935918 = weight(_text_:22 in 2647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.015935918 = score(doc=2647,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2647, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2647)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Content
    1. Introduction With the diversification of the material available in library collections such as: music, film, 3D objects, cartographic material and electronic resources like CD-ROMS and Web sites, the existing cataloguing principles and codes are no longer adequate to enable the user to find, identify, select and obtain a particular entity. The problem is not only that material fails to be appropriately represented in the catalogue records but also access to such material, or parts of it, is difficult if possible at all. Consequently, the need emerged to develop new rules and build up a new conceptual model able to cope with all the requirements demanded by the existing library material. The Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records developed by an IFLA Study Group from 1992 through 1997 present a generalised view of the bibliographic universe and are intended to be independent of any cataloguing code or implementation (Tillett, 2002). Outstanding scholars like Antonio Panizzi, Charles A. Cutter and Seymour Lubetzky formulated the basic cataloguing principles of which some can be retrieved, as Denton (2003) argues as updated versions, between the basic lines of the FRBR model: - the relation work-author groups all the works of an author - all the editions, translations, adaptations of a work are clearly separated (as expressions and manifestations) - all the expressions and manifestations of a work are collocated with their related works in bibliographic families - any document (manifestation and item) can be found if the author, title or subject of that document is known - the author is authorised by the authority control - the title is an intrinsic part of the work + authority control entity
    Date
    17. 6.2015 14:40:22
  2. DeZelar-Tiedman, V.: Doing the LibraryThing(TM) in an academic library catalog (2008) 0.00
    0.0033085097 = product of:
      0.014888294 = sum of:
        0.0069203344 = product of:
          0.013840669 = sum of:
            0.013840669 = weight(_text_:web in 2666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.013840669 = score(doc=2666,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.14422815 = fieldWeight in 2666, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2666)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.007967959 = product of:
          0.015935918 = sum of:
            0.015935918 = weight(_text_:22 in 2666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.015935918 = score(doc=2666,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2666, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2666)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
    
    Abstract
    Many libraries and other cultural institutions are incorporating Web 2.0 features and enhanced metadata into their catalogs (Trant 2006). These value-added elements include those typically found in commercial and social networking sites, such as book jacket images, reviews, and usergenerated tags. One such site that libraries are exploring as a model is LibraryThing (www.librarything.com) LibraryThing is a social networking site that allows users to "catalog" their own book collections. Members can add tags and reviews to records for books, as well as engage in online discussions. In addition to its service for individuals, LibraryThing offers a feebased service to libraries, where institutions can add LibraryThing tags, recommendations, and other features to their online catalog records. This poster will present data analyzing the quality and quantity of the metadata that a large academic library would expect to gain if utilizing such a service, focusing on the overlap between titles found in the library's catalog and in LibraryThing's database, and on a comparison between the controlled subject headings in the former and the user-generated tags in the latter. During February through April 2008, a random sample of 383 titles from the University of Minnesota Libraries catalog was searched in LibraryThing. Eighty works, or 21 percent of the sample, had corresponding records available in LibraryThing. Golder and Huberman (2006) outline the advantages and disadvantages of using controlled vocabulary for subject access to information resources versus the growing trend of tags supplied by users or by content creators. Using the 80 matched records from the sample, comparisons were made between the user-supplied tags in LibraryThing (social tags) and the subject headings in the library catalog records (controlled vocabulary system). In the library records, terms from all 6XX MARC fields were used. To make a more meaningful comparison, controlled subject terms were broken down into facets according to their headings and subheadings, and each unique facet counted separately. A total of 227 subject terms were applied to the 80 catalog records, an average of 2.84 per record. In LibraryThing, 698 tags were applied to the same 80 titles, an average of 8.73 per title. The poster will further explore the relationships between the terms applied in each source, and identify where overlaps and complementary levels of access occur.
    Source
    Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
  3. Lubetzky, S.: Writings on the classical art of cataloging (2001) 0.00
    0.0026559862 = product of:
      0.023903877 = sum of:
        0.023903877 = product of:
          0.047807753 = sum of:
            0.047807753 = weight(_text_:22 in 2622) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.047807753 = score(doc=2622,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 2622, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2622)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Footnote
    Rez. in: Technicalities 22(2002) no.1, S.19-20 (S.S. Intner)
  4. Kemp, R.: Catalog/cataloging changes and Web 2.0 functionality : new directions for serials (2008) 0.00
    0.0023306834 = product of:
      0.02097615 = sum of:
        0.02097615 = product of:
          0.0419523 = sum of:
            0.0419523 = weight(_text_:web in 2254) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0419523 = score(doc=2254,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.43716836 = fieldWeight in 2254, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2254)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    This article presents an overview of some of the important recent developments in cataloging theory and practice and online catalog design. Changes in cataloging theory and practice include the incorporation of the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records principles into catalogs, the new Resource Description and Access cataloging manual, and the new CONSER Standard Record. Web 2.0 functionalities and advances in search technology and results displays are influencing online catalog design. The paper ends with hypothetical scenarios in which a catalog, enhanced by the developments described, fulfills the tasks of finding serials articles and titles.
    Object
    Web 2.0
  5. McCathieNevile, C.; Méndez Rodríguez, E.M.: Library cards for the 21st century (2006) 0.00
    0.002306778 = product of:
      0.020761002 = sum of:
        0.020761002 = product of:
          0.041522004 = sum of:
            0.041522004 = weight(_text_:web in 240) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.041522004 = score(doc=240,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.43268442 = fieldWeight in 240, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=240)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    This paper presents several reflections on the traditional card catalogues and RDF (Resource Description Framework), which is "the" standard for creating the Semantic Web. This work grew out of discussion between the authors after Working Group on Metadata Schemes meeting held at IFLA conference in Buenos Aires (2004). The paper provides an overview of RDF from the perspective of cataloguers, catalogues and library cards. The central theme is the discussion of resource description as a discipline that could be based on RDF. RDF is explained as a very simple grammar, using metadata and ontologies to semantic search and access. RDF Knitting the Semantic Web Cataloging & Classification Quarterly Volume 43, Numbers 3/4 has the ability to enhance 21st century libraries and metadata interoperability in digital libraries, while maintaining the expressive power that was available to librarians when catalogues were physical artefacts.
    Footnote
    Simultaneously published as Knitting the Semantic Web
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  6. Aliprand, J.M.: ¬The Unicode Standard : its scope, design prin. ciples, and prospects for international cataloging (2000) 0.00
    0.002213322 = product of:
      0.019919898 = sum of:
        0.019919898 = product of:
          0.039839797 = sum of:
            0.039839797 = weight(_text_:22 in 4608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.039839797 = score(doc=4608,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4608, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4608)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  7. Peterson, E.: Parallel systems : the coexistence of subject cataloging and folksonomy (2008) 0.00
    0.001902995 = product of:
      0.017126955 = sum of:
        0.017126955 = product of:
          0.03425391 = sum of:
            0.03425391 = weight(_text_:web in 251) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03425391 = score(doc=251,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.35694647 = fieldWeight in 251, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=251)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    Catalogers have always had to balance adherence to cataloging rules and authority files with creating cataloging that is current and relevant to users. That dilemma has been complicated in new ways because of user demands in the world of Web 2.0. Standardized cataloging is crucial for communication between computer systems, but patrons now have an expectation of social interaction on the Internet, as evidenced by the popularity of folksonomy. After a description of traditional subject cataloging and folksonomy, this article discusses several institutions where subject cataloging is still used, but where patron interaction is also encouraged. User-generated tags can coexist with controlled vocabulary such as subject headings.
    Object
    Web 2.0
  8. LeBlanc, J.; Kurth, M.: ¬An operational model for library metadata maintenance (2008) 0.00
    0.0018780662 = product of:
      0.016902596 = sum of:
        0.016902596 = product of:
          0.03380519 = sum of:
            0.03380519 = weight(_text_:22 in 101) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03380519 = score(doc=101,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 101, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=101)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    19. 6.2010 19:22:28
  9. El-Sherbini, M.A.: Cataloging and classification : review of the literature 2005-06 (2008) 0.00
    0.0017706576 = product of:
      0.015935918 = sum of:
        0.015935918 = product of:
          0.031871837 = sum of:
            0.031871837 = weight(_text_:22 in 249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031871837 = score(doc=249,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 249, 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=249)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  10. Budd, J.: Exploring categorization : undergraduate student searching and the evolution of catalogs (2007) 0.00
    0.0017706576 = product of:
      0.015935918 = sum of:
        0.015935918 = product of:
          0.031871837 = sum of:
            0.031871837 = weight(_text_:22 in 256) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031871837 = score(doc=256,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 256, 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=256)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  11. Miksa, S.D.: ¬The challenges of change : a review of cataloging and classification literature, 2003-2004 (2007) 0.00
    0.0017706576 = product of:
      0.015935918 = sum of:
        0.015935918 = product of:
          0.031871837 = sum of:
            0.031871837 = weight(_text_:22 in 266) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031871837 = score(doc=266,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 266, 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=266)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  12. Bowman, J.H.: ¬The catalog as barrier to retrieval : Part 1: hyphens and ampersands in titles (2000) 0.00
    0.0015493254 = product of:
      0.013943928 = sum of:
        0.013943928 = product of:
          0.027887857 = sum of:
            0.027887857 = weight(_text_:22 in 5365) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.027887857 = score(doc=5365,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5365, 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=5365)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    An Internet survey of 38 different OPAC systems, at eighty different libraries, was undertaken to investigate the effect on retrieval of the presence of the hyphen or the ampersand in titles. Title and Keyword searches were performed. In Title search, 22 of the systems treat the hyphen as equivalent to a space, while in Keyword the number is 16. The other systems treat it in various different ways (even including the equivalent of NOT), which means that results of searching multiple catalogs are very inconsistent. The ampersand may be ignored, treated as a special character, or treated as "and," again with very inconsistent results. Various recommendations are made with a view to improving consistency of performance.
  13. Marcum, D.B.: ¬The future of cataloging (2006) 0.00
    0.0015493254 = product of:
      0.013943928 = sum of:
        0.013943928 = product of:
          0.027887857 = sum of:
            0.027887857 = weight(_text_:22 in 114) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.027887857 = score(doc=114,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 114, 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=114)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  14. Oberhauser, O.: Card-image public access catalogues (CIPACs) : an international survey (2003) 0.00
    0.0013456206 = product of:
      0.012110585 = sum of:
        0.012110585 = product of:
          0.02422117 = sum of:
            0.02422117 = weight(_text_:web in 4179) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02422117 = score(doc=4179,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.25239927 = fieldWeight in 4179, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4179)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    This paper surveys card-image public access catalogues (CIPACs) - online library catalogues based an databases of digitised catalogue cards and more or less sophisticated mechanisms for browsing or searching. Solutions of this kind have been implemented by a number of libraries in various countries since the mid-1990s, mainly as inexpensive altematives to a full retrospective conversion of their old catalogues. The article presents a Web page dedicated to CIPACs, identifies and describes four main categories of interface software for such catalogues, and provides a comparative overview of 50 CIPACs in 11 countries, looking at aspects such as geographical distribution, growth and size, software, number of catalogues, processing and index creation, navigation, image formats, and other features.
  15. Voß, J.; Hellmich, J.: »Am Kerngeschäft der Bibliothekare kann sich plötzlich jeder beteiligen« (2007) 0.00
    0.0013456206 = product of:
      0.012110585 = sum of:
        0.012110585 = product of:
          0.02422117 = sum of:
            0.02422117 = weight(_text_:web in 397) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02422117 = score(doc=397,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.25239927 = fieldWeight in 397, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=397)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Abstract
    Der Wikipedia-Experte Jakob Voß plädiert dafür, Opacs mit Inhalten aus Wikis, Weblogs und Bookmarking-Diensten anzureichern Auf dem Leipziger Bibliothekskongress hat Jakob Voß einen Vortrag zum Thema »Soziale Software - Hype oder Verheißung?« gehalten - und damit eine der bestbesuchten Veranstaltungen eingeleitet. Der 28-Jährige hat Informatik, Bibliothekswissenschaft und Philosophie in Chemnitz und Berlin studiert und arbeitet als Entwickler beim Gemeinsamen Bibliotheksverbund GBV in Göttingen. Seit 2002 gehörter zum Vorstand von Wikimedia Deutschland, einem »Verein zur Förderung des freien Wissens«, dessen prominentestes Förderprojekt die Web-Enzyklopädie Wikipedia ist. BuB-Redakteurin Julia Hellmich hat Jakob Voß in Leipzig interviewt.
  16. Bates, M.J.: Speculations on browsing, directed searching, and linking in relation to the Bradford distribution (2002) 0.00
    0.0013279931 = product of:
      0.011951938 = sum of:
        0.011951938 = product of:
          0.023903877 = sum of:
            0.023903877 = weight(_text_:22 in 54) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.023903877 = score(doc=54,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 54, 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=54)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Date
    22. 2.2007 18:56:23
  17. Arsenault, C.; Ménard, E.: Searching titles with initial articles in library catalogs : a case study and search behavior analysis (2007) 0.00
    0.0013279931 = product of:
      0.011951938 = sum of:
        0.011951938 = product of:
          0.023903877 = sum of:
            0.023903877 = weight(_text_:22 in 2264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.023903877 = score(doc=2264,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2264, 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=2264)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  18. Byrum, J.D.: ¬The emerging global bibliographical network : the era of international standardization in the development of cataloging policy (2000) 0.00
    0.001106661 = product of:
      0.009959949 = sum of:
        0.009959949 = product of:
          0.019919898 = sum of:
            0.019919898 = weight(_text_:22 in 190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.019919898 = score(doc=190,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10297151 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 190, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=190)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  19. Report on the future of bibliographic control : draft for public comment (2007) 0.00
    9.988644E-4 = product of:
      0.008989779 = sum of:
        0.008989779 = product of:
          0.017979559 = sum of:
            0.017979559 = weight(_text_:web in 1271) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.017979559 = score(doc=1271,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.18735787 = fieldWeight in 1271, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1271)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    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.
  20. hbz: ¬Das Suchraum-Konzept (2007) 0.00
    9.611576E-4 = product of:
      0.008650418 = sum of:
        0.008650418 = product of:
          0.017300837 = sum of:
            0.017300837 = weight(_text_:web in 310) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.017300837 = score(doc=310,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.09596372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02940506 = queryNorm
                0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 310, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=310)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    
    Content
    "Wer wissenschaftliche Informationen und Fachliteratur sucht, kommt mit einer herkömmlichen Internet-Suchmaschine nicht weit. Auch Bibliothekskataloge und Datenbanken helfen nur begrenzt weiter, da es zu viele Anlaufstellen im Web gibt. Das Hochschulbibliothekszentrum NRW (hbz) arbeitet deshalb an der technischen Infrastrukturlösung eines gemeinsamen Suchraums. Der Suchraum fasst mithilfe modernster Suchmaschinentechnologie viele unterschiedliche Datenquellen zu einem optimierten Index zusammen, der von verschiedenen Suchanwendungen in Sekundenschnelle abgefragt werden kann. Zu den Datenbeständen des Suchraums gehören die Kataloge der deutschsprachigen Bibliotheken sowie Artikel aus den Wissenschaftszeitschriften. Hinzu kommen Abstracts, Inhaltsverzeichnisse und andere Informationen. Ergänzt wird dieser Suchindex durch einen Zugriff auf Fachdatenbanken, die zum Beispiel das vascodaProjekt zusammenträgt. Die Suchanwendungen wie beispielsweise die Portal-Lösung »DigiBib - Die Digitale Bibliothek« müssen nur noch den einheitlich aufgebauten Index durchsuchen und erhalten die Ergebnisse nach wenigen Millisekunden. In der Realität existiert eine solche virtuelle Metabibliothek nur in den Anfängen. Der Dreiländerkatalog des hbz und das Wissenschaftsportal vascoda sind ein großer Schritt auf dem Weg zu diesem gemeinsamen Suchraum. Er kann nur durch eine - inhaltlich und geografisch-weiträumige Kooperation der Universitäten, Bibliotheken, Verlage und anderer Anbieter von Fachinformationen der deutschsprachigen Länder aufgebaut werden. Die Grundlagen für dieses Ziel wurden bereits vom hbz gelegt. Die Teilnahme am Suchraum ist eine lohnende Aufgabe für die Bibliotheken und Wissenschaftsorganisationen: Am Ende steht eine wissenschaftliche Suchmaschine, die alle wichtigen und nützlichen Datenquellen erfasst."