Search (145 results, page 2 of 8)

  • × language_ss:"e"
  • × theme_ss:"Katalogfragen allgemein"
  1. Panchyshyn, R.S.; Park, A.L.: Resource Description and Access (RDA) database enrichment : the path to a hybridized catalog (2015) 0.04 
    0.03621646 = product of:
  0.07243292 = sum of:
    0.03790077 = weight(_text_:library in 2017) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03790077 = score(doc=2017,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.28758827 = fieldWeight in 2017, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2017)
    0.034532152 = product of:
      0.069064304 = sum of:
        0.069064304 = weight(_text_:project in 2017) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.069064304 = score(doc=2017,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.32644984 = fieldWeight in 2017, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2017)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    This article examines the benefits of a Resource Description and Access (RDA) enrichment project for libraries. Enrichment projects "hybridize", or enrich legacy Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules, Second Edition (AACR2) bibliographic records with RDA data. Until a replacement for MARC is developed, bibliographic data will continue to be encoded in MARC 21 in many integrated library systems. Library catalogs contain records coded under both AACR2 and RDA standards. RDA enrichment projects benefit the patron experience because the data is cleaner and more consistent for patron use and display, cataloging staff workflows are simplified, and the consistency of the data is advantageous for system development and data exchange with other communities
  2. Payant, A.; Skeen, B.; Woolcott, L.: Initiating cultural shifts in perceptions of cataloging units through interaction assessment (2017) 0.04 
    0.03621646 = product of:
  0.07243292 = sum of:
    0.03790077 = weight(_text_:library in 5157) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03790077 = score(doc=5157,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.28758827 = fieldWeight in 5157, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5157)
    0.034532152 = product of:
      0.069064304 = sum of:
        0.069064304 = weight(_text_:project in 5157) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.069064304 = score(doc=5157,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.32644984 = fieldWeight in 5157, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5157)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Points of contact formulate the culture of any organization and shape the perceptions of decision makers and colleagues alike. This research project investigated the interactions between Cataloging and Metadata Services staff and other library employees by analyzing interactions. This article summarizes the results of data gathered from interaction assessments and compares them with surveys about the current perceptions of the cataloging unit at the Utah State University Libraries. It discusses the ways these results have influenced existing unit workflows to enhance awareness of cataloging and metadata contributions to the library and posits possible ways to continue such initiatives moving forward.
  3. Aliprand, J.M.: ¬The Unicode Standard : its scope, design prin. ciples, and prospects for international cataloging (2000) 0.04 
    0.0361197 = product of:
  0.0722394 = sum of:
    0.03828556 = weight(_text_:library in 4608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03828556 = score(doc=4608,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.29050803 = fieldWeight in 4608, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4608)
    0.033953834 = product of:
      0.06790767 = sum of:
        0.06790767 = weight(_text_:22 in 4608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06790767 = score(doc=4608,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 44(2000) no.3, S.160-167
  4. Hillmann, D.I.: "Parallel universes" or meaningful relationships : envisioning a future for the OPAC and the net (1996) 0.04 
    0.035239115 = product of:
  0.07047823 = sum of:
    0.043315165 = weight(_text_:library in 5581) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.043315165 = score(doc=5581,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.32867232 = fieldWeight in 5581, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5581)
    0.027163066 = product of:
      0.054326132 = sum of:
        0.054326132 = weight(_text_:22 in 5581) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054326132 = score(doc=5581,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5581, 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=5581)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Over the past year, innumerable discussions on the relationship between traditional library OPACs and the newly burgeoning World WideWeb have occured in many libraries and in virtually every library related discussion list. Rumors and speculation abound, some insisting that SGML will replace USMARC "soon," others maintaining that OPACs that haven't migrated to the Web will go the way of the dinosaurs.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) nos.3/4, S.97-103
  5. El-Sherbini, M.A.: Cataloging and classification : review of the literature 2005-06 (2008) 0.04 
    0.035239115 = product of:
  0.07047823 = sum of:
    0.043315165 = weight(_text_:library in 249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.043315165 = score(doc=249,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.32867232 = fieldWeight in 249, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=249)
    0.027163066 = product of:
      0.054326132 = sum of:
        0.054326132 = weight(_text_:22 in 249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054326132 = score(doc=249,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    This paper reviews library literature on cataloging and classification published in 2005-06. It covers pertinent literature in the following areas: the future of cataloging; Functional Requirement for Bibliographic Records (FRBR); metadata and its applications and relation to Machine-Readable Cataloging (MARC); cataloging tools and standards; authority control; and recruitment, training, and the changing role of catalogers.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 52(2008) no.3, S.148-163
  6. Budd, J.: Exploring categorization : undergraduate student searching and the evolution of catalogs (2007) 0.04 
    0.035239115 = product of:
  0.07047823 = sum of:
    0.043315165 = weight(_text_:library in 256) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.043315165 = score(doc=256,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.32867232 = fieldWeight in 256, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=256)
    0.027163066 = product of:
      0.054326132 = sum of:
        0.054326132 = weight(_text_:22 in 256) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054326132 = score(doc=256,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Debate about the future of library catalogs and cataloging has been, and continues to be, featured in the literature of librarianship. Some research into the ways undergraduate students at one institution assign subjects to selected works provides insight into the cognitive elements of categorization. The design of catalogs can be informed by this research, as well as work currently being done on alternative means of organization, such as information systems ontologies.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 51(2007) no.4, S.286-292
  7. Arsenault, C.; Ménard, E.: Searching titles with initial articles in library catalogs : a case study and search behavior analysis (2007) 0.03 
    0.033157483 = product of:
  0.066314965 = sum of:
    0.045942668 = weight(_text_:library in 2264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045942668 = score(doc=2264,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.34860963 = fieldWeight in 2264, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2264)
    0.0203723 = product of:
      0.0407446 = sum of:
        0.0407446 = weight(_text_:22 in 2264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0407446 = score(doc=2264,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    This study examines problems caused by initial articles in library catalogs. The problematic records observed are those whose titles begin with a word erroneously considered to be an article at the retrieval stage. Many retrieval algorithms edit queries by removing initial words corresponding to articles found in an exclusion list even whether the initial word is an article or not. Consequently, a certain number of documents remain more difficult to find. The study also examines user behavior during known-item retrieval using the title index in library catalogs, concentrating on the problems caused by the presence of an initial article or of a word homograph to an article. Measures of success and effectiveness are taken to determine if retrieval is affected in such cases.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 51(2007) no.3, S.190-203
  8. Randall, N.B.: Spelling errors in the database : shadow or substance? (1999) 0.03 
    0.030834224 = product of:
  0.06166845 = sum of:
    0.03790077 = weight(_text_:library in 106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03790077 = score(doc=106,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.28758827 = fieldWeight in 106, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=106)
    0.023767682 = product of:
      0.047535364 = sum of:
        0.047535364 = weight(_text_:22 in 106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047535364 = score(doc=106,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 106, 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=106)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Describes the results of research to determine the extent of spelling errors in the State University of New York at Albany's online catalogue, whether these errors seriously affect users' access to library materials and what effect spelling errors will have on the group database planned for the State University of New York (SUNY). Using standard database tests, the catalogues of the four SUNY University Centers (Albany, Binghamton, Buffalo and Stony Brook) were studied. In addition, two comparison catalogues were studied: the New York State Library's Excelsior and California University's Melvyl. Results show that misspellings are unavoidable due to the way that most catalogues were built. These errors, however, are rarely an impediment to retrieval. Concludes with suggested ways to find and correct misspellings without expensive large scale efforts
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 43(1999) no.3, S.161-169
  9. LeBlanc, J.; Kurth, M.: ¬An operational model for library metadata maintenance (2008) 0.03 
    0.03064858 = product of:
  0.06129716 = sum of:
    0.032486375 = weight(_text_:library in 101) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032486375 = score(doc=101,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.24650425 = fieldWeight in 101, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=101)
    0.028810784 = product of:
      0.05762157 = sum of:
        0.05762157 = weight(_text_:22 in 101) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05762157 = score(doc=101,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    19. 6.2010 19:22:28
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 52(2008) no.1, S.54-59
  10. 82 Millionen Titel in 470 Sprachen : Deutsche Nationalbibliothek ist Bestandteil des weltweit größten Bibliothekskatalogs (2007) 0.03 
    0.030495238 = product of:
  0.060990475 = sum of:
    0.034465462 = weight(_text_:digital in 425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034465462 = score(doc=425,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.17432621 = fieldWeight in 425, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=425)
    0.026525015 = weight(_text_:library in 425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026525015 = score(doc=425,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.20126988 = fieldWeight in 425, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=425)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Content
    "Mit der Bereitstellung ihrer Titeldaten im Weltkatalog der Bibliotheken ist die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek einen weiteren Schritt auf Informationssuchende zugegangen. Rund 7,9 Millionen Einträge der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek aus den Jahren 1913 bis 2007 sind im WorldCat des OCLC (Online Computer Library Center) nachgewiesen. Monatlich kommen, wie die Einrichtung mitteilt, allein aus der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek mehr als 15000 Titeldatensätze dazu. Der WorldCat (www.worldcat.org) dient in den USA - zunehmend auch weltweit - als wichtigster Sucheinstieg für Bibliotheksbestände und entwickelt sich auch für Deutschland zu einem umfangreichen Gesamtkatalog. Neben der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek sind die Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Göttingen, die Zentral- und Landesbibliothek Berlin, die Bayerische Staatsbibliothek sowie die Verbünde GBV und BSZ im WorldCat vertreten. Elisabeth Niggemann, Generaldirektorin der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek, über die Zusammenarbeit: »Mit dem Nachweis im OCLC WorldCat sind unsere Bestände für die Öffentlichkeit nochmals besser sichtbar geworden. Bibliotheken haben die Aufgabe, ihre Bestände möglichst leicht auffindbar zu machen und sich dort zu präsentieren, wo nach Informationen gesucht wird.« Haupteinstiegspunkt für die Suche nach Informationen sind mittlerweile Suchmaschinen wie Google oder Yahoo. WorldCat hat seine Daten für diese Suchmaschinen geöffnet, sodass schon zu Beginn der Suche auf die Bestände von Bibliotheken hingewiesen wird. Darüber hinaus bietet der WorldCat eine Umkreissuche an. Informationssuchende erhalten Angaben über die nächstgelegene Bibliothek mit dem Titel im Bestand.
    Der OCLC WorldCat enthält zurzeit knapp 82 Millionen Titeleinträge in 470 Sprachen, die etwa 1,3 Milliarden Medieneinheiten aus mehr als 10 000 in der Welt verteilten Bibliotheken repräsentieren. Informationssuchende finden im WorldCat die benötigten Werke mit einem Nachweis der Bestände in den teilnehmenden Bibliotheken. Bestände sichtbar machen Für die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek ist die Teilnahme am OCLC WorldCat ein weiterer Schritt auf dem eingeschlagenen Weg, die eigenen Bestände möglichst umfassend sichtbar zu machen und den eigenen Katalog mit anderen Verzeichnissen zu vernetzen. So ist der Katalog der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek in das Portal The European Library eingebunden, er ist mit den Personeneinträgen der Wikipedia Enzyklopädie verknüpft und er bietet eine Lieferbarkeitsabfrage im Shopsystem des Deutschen Buchhandels direkt aus der Titelanzeige heraus. Zur Erläuterung: Das Online Computer Library Center (OCLC) ist eine weltweit tätige Non-Profit-Organisation mit Sitz in Dublin, Ohio. Es fungiert als Dienstleister für Bibliotheken aller Art und bietet unter anderem den frei zugänglichen WorldCat im Internet an. WorldCat ist wegweisend in der Inhaltserschließung: So gibt es erste Web 2.0 Ansätze, in denen Nutzer die Titeleinträge selbstständig verschlagworten können, beziehungsweise die Titel mit Rezensionen, Abstracts oder Kurzbiografien anreichern können."
    Series
    Foyer: Information digital
  11. Miksa, S.D.: ¬The challenges of change : a review of cataloging and classification literature, 2003-2004 (2007) 0.03 
    0.028895756 = product of:
  0.057791512 = sum of:
    0.030628446 = weight(_text_:library in 266) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030628446 = score(doc=266,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 266, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=266)
    0.027163066 = product of:
      0.054326132 = sum of:
        0.054326132 = weight(_text_:22 in 266) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054326132 = score(doc=266,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 51(2007) no.1, S.51-68
  12. Hillmann, D.I.: 'Parallel universes' or meaningful relationships : envisioning a future for the OPAC and the net (1996) 0.03 
    0.025283787 = product of:
  0.050567575 = sum of:
    0.026799891 = weight(_text_:library in 3656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026799891 = score(doc=3656,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.20335563 = fieldWeight in 3656, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3656)
    0.023767682 = product of:
      0.047535364 = sum of:
        0.047535364 = weight(_text_:22 in 3656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047535364 = score(doc=3656,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3656, 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=3656)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Briefly follows the debate concerning: the relationship between traditional library OPACs and the WWW; possible replacement of USMARC format with SGML; and the possible demise of OPACs that do not migrate to the WWW. Discusses the approach taken by the Text encoding Initative (TEI) in their use of a mandatory TEI header in their standard SGML application as the first since CIP to explore attaching bibliographic information to the item itself to assist cataloguing
    Series
    Cataloging and classification quarterly; vol.22, nos.3/4
  13. McMillan, G.: Electronic theses and dissertations : merging perspectives (1996) 0.03 
    0.025283787 = product of:
  0.050567575 = sum of:
    0.026799891 = weight(_text_:library in 601) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026799891 = score(doc=601,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.20335563 = fieldWeight in 601, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=601)
    0.023767682 = product of:
      0.047535364 = sum of:
        0.047535364 = weight(_text_:22 in 601) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047535364 = score(doc=601,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 601, 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=601)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Theses and dissertations as electronic files transferred from the student author to the Graduate School to the Library may well be the first major source of electronic texts that many libraries encounter. To prepare for this potential influx of electronic texts, an ad hoc task force considered work flow and cataloging guidelines. The author suggests expanding current theses cataloging and taking advantage of online information prepared by authors so that the bibliographic records provide OPACS with much more valuable information than does traditional theses cataloging. This should not require a lot of extra work.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) nos.3/4, S.105-125
  14. Byrum, J.D.: ¬The emerging global bibliographical network : the era of international standardization in the development of cataloging policy (2000) 0.03 
    0.025066596 = product of:
  0.05013319 = sum of:
    0.033156272 = weight(_text_:library in 190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033156272 = score(doc=190,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.25158736 = fieldWeight in 190, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=190)
    0.016976917 = product of:
      0.033953834 = sum of:
        0.033953834 = weight(_text_:22 in 190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033953834 = score(doc=190,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Catalogers have become interdependent in their pursuit to provide bibliographic control and access. This interdependency has brought with it the need for greater agreement in applying common cataloging policies and rules. The expanded application of AACR2 (Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules) is fostering greater uniformity in the provision of bibliographic description and access. The rules have been translated into numerous languages and used in European, Middle Eastern, and Latin American countries. Cataloging committees and individual libraries in Europe and South Africa have expressed strong interest in adopting, adapting, or aligning with AACR2. PCC (Program for Cooperative Cataloguing) is one of the most successful cooperative cataloging efforts and has a considerable international component, which encourages the use of AACR, LCSH (Library of Congress Subject Headings), and MARC. AACR2 is successful on an international level because it is based in internationally developed standards, including ISBDs and the Paris Principles. ISBDs (International Standard Bibliographic Description) and the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records are examples of the contributions that IFLA (International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions) has made to the internationalization of cataloging. IFLA sponsored the international conference that resulted in the Paris Principles as well as subsequent projects to craft international policy in relation to uniform headings for persons, corporate bodies, and titles.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 44(2000) no.3, S.114-121
  15. Clarke, R.I.: Cataloging research by design : a taxonomic approach to understanding research questions in cataloging (2018) 0.02 
    0.024985643 = product of:
  0.09994257 = sum of:
    0.09994257 = sum of:
      0.059197973 = weight(_text_:project in 5188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.059197973 = score(doc=5188,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050121464 = queryNorm
          0.27981415 = fieldWeight in 5188, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5188)
      0.0407446 = weight(_text_:22 in 5188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0407446 = score(doc=5188,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050121464 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5188, 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=5188)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    This article asserts that many research questions (RQs) in cataloging reflect design-based RQs, rather than traditional scientific ones. To support this idea, a review of existing discussions of RQs is presented to identify prominent types of RQs, including design-based RQs. RQ types are then classified into a taxonomic framework and compared with RQs from the Everyday Cataloger Concerns project, which aimed to identify important areas of research from the perspective of practicing catalogers. This comparative method demonstrates the ways in which the research areas identified by cataloging practitioners reflect design RQs-and therefore require design approaches and methods to answer them.
    Date
    30. 5.2019 19:14:22
  16. Conversations with catalogers in the 21st century (2011) 0.02 
    0.022871431 = product of:
  0.045742862 = sum of:
    0.025849098 = weight(_text_:digital in 4530) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025849098 = score(doc=4530,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.13074467 = fieldWeight in 4530, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=4530)
    0.019893762 = weight(_text_:library in 4530) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019893762 = score(doc=4530,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.15095241 = fieldWeight in 4530, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=4530)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Library specialists in the cataloging and metadata professions have a greater purpose than simply managing information and connecting users to resources. There is a deeper and more profound impact that comes of their work: preservation of the human record. Conversations with Catalogers in the 21st Century contains four chapters addressing broad categories of issues that catalogers and metadata librarians are currently facing. Every important topic is covered, such as changing metadata practices, standards, data record structures, data platforms, and user expectations, providing both theoretical and practical information. Guidelines for dealing with present challenges are based on fundamentals from the past. Recommendations on training staff, building new information platforms of digital library resources, documenting new cataloging and metadata competencies, and establishing new workflows enable a real-world game plan for improvement.
    Series
    Libraries Unlimited library management collection
  17. Frâncu, V.: ¬An interpretation of the FRBR model (2004) 0.02 
    0.02210499 = product of:
  0.04420998 = sum of:
    0.030628446 = weight(_text_:library in 2647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030628446 = score(doc=2647,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 2647, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2647)
    0.013581533 = product of:
      0.027163066 = sum of:
        0.027163066 = weight(_text_:22 in 2647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027163066 = score(doc=2647,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Despite the existence of a logical structural model for bibliographic records which integrates any record type, library catalogues persist in offering catalogue records at the level of 'items'. Such records however, do not clearly indicate which works they contain. Hence the search possibilities of the end user are unduly limited. The Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) present through a conceptual model, independent of any cataloguing code or implementation, a globalized view of the bibliographic universe. This model, a synthesis of the existing cataloguing rules, consists of clearly structured entities and well defined types of relationships among them. From a theoretical viewpoint, the model is likely to be a good knowledge organiser with great potential in identifying the author and the work represented by an item or publication and is able to link different works of the author with different editions, translations or adaptations of those works aiming at better answering the user needs. This paper is presenting an interpretation of the FRBR model opposing it to a traditional bibliographic record of a complex library material.
    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
  18. DeZelar-Tiedman, V.: Doing the LibraryThing(TM) in an academic library catalog (2008) 0.02 
    0.02210499 = product of:
  0.04420998 = sum of:
    0.030628446 = weight(_text_:library in 2666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030628446 = score(doc=2666,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 2666, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2666)
    0.013581533 = product of:
      0.027163066 = sum of:
        0.027163066 = weight(_text_:22 in 2666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027163066 = score(doc=2666,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    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
  19. Leazer, G.H.; Smiraglia, R.P.: Bibliographic families in the library catalog : a qualitative analysis and grounded theory (1999) 0.02 
    0.022024449 = product of:
  0.044048898 = sum of:
    0.027071979 = weight(_text_:library in 107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027071979 = score(doc=107,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.2054202 = fieldWeight in 107, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=107)
    0.016976917 = product of:
      0.033953834 = sum of:
        0.033953834 = weight(_text_:22 in 107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033953834 = score(doc=107,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 107, 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=107)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 43(1999) no.4, S.191-212
  20. Homan, P.A.: Library catalog notes for "bad books" : ethics vs. responsibilities (2012) 0.02 
    0.022024449 = product of:
  0.044048898 = sum of:
    0.027071979 = weight(_text_:library in 420) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027071979 = score(doc=420,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.2054202 = fieldWeight in 420, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=420)
    0.016976917 = product of:
      0.033953834 = sum of:
        0.033953834 = weight(_text_:22 in 420) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033953834 = score(doc=420,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 420, 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=420)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    The conflict between librarians' ethics and their responsibilities in the process of progressive collection management, which applies the principles of cost accounting to libraries, to call attention to the "bad books" in their collections that are compromised by age, error, abridgement, expurgation, plagiarism, copyright violation, libel, or fraud, is discussed. According to Charles Cutter, notes in catalog records should call attention to the best books but ignore the bad ones. Libraries that can afford to keep their "bad books," however, which often have a valuable second life, must call attention to their intellectual contexts in notes in the catalog records. Michael Bellesiles's Arming America, the most famous case of academic fraud at the turn of the twenty-first century, is used as a test case. Given the bias of content enhancement that automatically pulls content from the Web into library catalogs, catalog notes for "bad books" may be the only way for librarians to uphold their ethical principles regarding collection management while fulfilling their professional responsibilities to their users in calling attention to their "bad books."
    Date
    27. 9.2012 14:22:00

Authors

Years

Types

  • a 128
  • el 14
  • m 7
  • s 5
  • r 4
  • b 3
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications