Search (91 results, page 1 of 5)

  • × language_ss:"e"
  • × theme_ss:"Katalogfragen allgemein"
  1. Julien, C.-A.; Guastavino, C.; Bouthillier, F.: Capitalizing on information organization and information visualization for a new-generation catalogue (2012) 0.05 
    0.054302596 = product of:
  0.08145389 = sum of:
    0.022522911 = weight(_text_:im in 5567) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022522911 = score(doc=5567,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1442303 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051022716 = queryNorm
        0.15615936 = fieldWeight in 5567, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5567)
    0.058930974 = product of:
      0.08839646 = sum of:
        0.051922753 = weight(_text_:online in 5567) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.051922753 = score(doc=5567,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.33531237 = fieldWeight in 5567, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5567)
        0.03647371 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5567) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03647371 = score(doc=5567,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.23632148 = fieldWeight in 5567, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5567)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Subject searching is difficult with traditional text-based online public access library catalogues (OPACs), and the next-generation discovery layers are keyword searching and result filtering tools that offer little support for subject browsing. Next-generation OPACs ignore the rich network of relations offered by controlled subject vocabulary, which can facilitate subject browsing. A new generation of OPACs could leverage existing information-organization investments and offer online searchers a novel browsing and searching environment. This is a case study of the design and development of a virtual reality subject browsing and information retrieval tool. The functional prototype shows that the Library of Congress subject headings (LCSH) can be shaped into a useful and usable tree structure serving as a visual metaphor that contains a real world collection from the domain of science and engineering. Formative tests show that users can effectively browse the LCSH tree and carve it up based on their keyword search queries. This study uses a complex information-organization structure as a defining characteristic of an OPAC that goes beyond the standard keyword search model, toward the cutting edge of online search tools.
    Theme
    Verbale Doksprachen im Online-Retrieval
  2. Pirmann, C.: Tags in the catalogue : insights from a usability study of LibraryThing for libraries (2012) 0.04 
    0.04279561 = product of:
  0.06419341 = sum of:
    0.022522911 = weight(_text_:im in 5570) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022522911 = score(doc=5570,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1442303 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051022716 = queryNorm
        0.15615936 = fieldWeight in 5570, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5570)
    0.041670498 = product of:
      0.062505744 = sum of:
        0.036714934 = weight(_text_:online in 5570) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.036714934 = score(doc=5570,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.23710167 = fieldWeight in 5570, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5570)
        0.025790809 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5570) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025790809 = score(doc=5570,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 5570, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5570)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH), the standard subject language used in library catalogues, are often criticized for their lack of currency, biased language, and atypical syndetic structure. Conversely, folksonomies (or tags), which rely on the natural language of their users, offer a flexibility often lacking in controlled vocabularies and may offer a means of augmenting more rigid controlled vocabularies such as LCSH. Content analysis studies have demonstrated the potential for folksonomies to be used as a means of enhancing subject access to materials, and libraries are beginning to integrate tagging systems into their catalogues. This study examines the utility of tags as a means of enhancing subject access to materials in library online public access catalogues (OPACs) through usability testing with the LibraryThing for Libraries catalogue enhancements. Findings indicate that while they cannot replace LCSH, tags do show promise for aiding information seeking in OPACs. In the context of information systems design, the study revealed that while folksonomies have the potential to enhance subject access to materials, that potential is severely limited by the current inability of catalogue interfaces to support tag-based searches alongside standard catalogue searches.
    Theme
    Verbale Doksprachen im Online-Retrieval
  3. 82 Millionen Titel in 470 Sprachen : Deutsche Nationalbibliothek ist Bestandteil des weltweit größten Bibliothekskatalogs (2007) 0.04 
    0.040502787 = product of:
  0.06075418 = sum of:
    0.050963532 = weight(_text_:im in 425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050963532 = score(doc=425,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.1442303 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051022716 = queryNorm
        0.35334828 = fieldWeight in 425, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=425)
    0.00979065 = product of:
      0.029371947 = sum of:
        0.029371947 = weight(_text_:online in 425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029371947 = score(doc=425,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.18968134 = fieldWeight in 425, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=425)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    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."
  4. Randall, N.B.: Spelling errors in the database : shadow or substance? (1999) 0.04 
    0.040281057 = product of:
  0.12084317 = sum of:
    0.12084317 = sum of:
      0.03634593 = weight(_text_:online in 106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03634593 = score(doc=106,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051022716 = queryNorm
          0.23471867 = fieldWeight in 106, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=106)
      0.03610713 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03610713 = score(doc=106,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051022716 = queryNorm
          0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 106, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=106)
      0.048390117 = weight(_text_:22 in 106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.048390117 = score(doc=106,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17867287 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051022716 = 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)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    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
  5. Managing cataloging and the organization of information : philosophies, practices and challenges at the onset of the 21st century (2000) 0.04 
    0.037035286 = product of:
  0.05555293 = sum of:
    0.027307581 = weight(_text_:im in 238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027307581 = score(doc=238,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1442303 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051022716 = queryNorm
        0.18933317 = fieldWeight in 238, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=238)
    0.02824535 = product of:
      0.042368025 = sum of:
        0.018172964 = weight(_text_:online in 238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018172964 = score(doc=238,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.11735933 = fieldWeight in 238, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=238)
        0.024195058 = weight(_text_:22 in 238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024195058 = score(doc=238,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17867287 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 238, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=238)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Footnote
    Rez. in ZfBB 51(2004) H.1, S.54-55 (G. Pflug): "Unter dem wachsenden Einfluss der Informationstechnologie auf den Bibliotheksbereich nimmt die Katalogisierung eine Schlüsselstellung ein. Das vorliegende Werk gliedert sich in zwei Teile. Der erste Abschnitt ist mit »National Libraries« überschrieben, befasst sich jedoch nur mit der Library of Congress und der National Library of Canada. Ihm folgen Artikel über »Libraries around the world«. Dabei fälltjedoch auf, dass diese Studien zwar Bibliotheken in Großbritannien, Australien, Mittel- und Südamerika und selbst Afrika (Botswana) behandeln, nicht jedoch aus Kontinentaleuropa, trotz entsprechender Aktivitäten etwa in den Niederlanden, in Frankreich oder den deutschsprachigen Ländern. Nur DOBIS/LIBIS wird erwähnt, aber nur, weil es für kurze Zeit die kanadische Entwicklung beeinflusst hat. Im zweiten Teil kommen Katalogisierungsfachleute aus vier Spezial- und neun akademischen Bibliotheken - ausschließlich aus Nordamerika und Großbritannien - zu Wort. So enthält das Werk in 22 Beispielen Berichte über individuelle und regionale Lösungen. Dabei steht die Frage im Vordergrund, zu welchen Änderungen in der Katalogisierungs- und Sacherschließungspraxis die neuen elektronischen Techniken geführt haben. So streben z.B. die englischen Hochschulbibliotheken ein koordiniertes System an. Mit dem Übergang der British Library zu MARC 21 wird das Katalogsystem in Großbritannien nachhaltig beeinflusst - um nur zwei nahe liegende Beispiele zu nennen. Insgesamt werden drei Aspekte behandelt, die Automatisierungstechnik; die dabei einzusetzende Kooperation und das Outsourcing - nicht nur durch Übernahme von Daten anderer Bibliotheken oder durch Verbundsysteme, vor allem der Library of Congress, sondern auch durch Buchhandelsfirmen wie Blackwell North America Authority Control Service. In der Frage der Sacherschließung befassen sich die Beiträge mit den im amerikanischen Bereich üblichen Klassifikationssystemen, vor allem der Colon Classification, Dewey in seinen beiden Formen oder der Library of Congress Classification. Für die deutsche Diskussion sind diese Aspekte vor allem wegen des Übergangs der Deutschen Bibliothek in ihrer Nationalbibliografie zur DDC von großem Interesse (vgl. Magda Heiner-Freiling: Die DDC in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie. In Dialog mit Bibliotheken. 15. 2003, Nr. 3, S. 8-13). Doch stellen auch die unterschiedlichen Überlegungen zur alphabetischen Katalogisierung, verbunden mit den da zugehörigen Datenbanken, einen interessanten Beitrag zur augenblicklichen Diskussion in Deutschland dar, da auch hier seit einigen Jahren die Katalogisierung nach RAK und ihre Ablösung eine lebhafte Diskussion ausgelöst hat, wie unter anderem der zusammenfassende Beitrag von Elisabeth Niggemann in: Dialog mit Bibliotheken (15. 2003, Nr. 2, S. 4-8) zeigt. Auch die angloamerikanischen und die mit ihnen zum Beispiel in Mexiko, Südamerika oder Australien verbundenen Bibliotheken - das zeigt das Buch deutlich - diskutieren die Frage der alphabetischen Katalogisierung kontrovers. So werden z.B. neben den dominanten AACR-Regeln mit ihrer Weiterentwicklung mehr als zehn andere Katalogisierungssysteme und rund 20 Online-Datenbanken behandelt. Damit liefert das Buch für die Diskussion in Deutschland und die anstehenden Entscheidungen in seiner Grundtendenz wie in den unterschiedlichen-auch widersprüchlichen-Aspekten dereinzelnen Beiträge wertvolle Anregungen."
  6. Conversations with catalogers in the 21st century (2011) 0.02 
    0.02358388 = product of:
  0.03537582 = sum of:
    0.030217657 = weight(_text_:im in 4530) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030217657 = score(doc=4530,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.1442303 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051022716 = queryNorm
        0.20950976 = fieldWeight in 4530, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=4530)
    0.0051581617 = product of:
      0.015474485 = sum of:
        0.015474485 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4530) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015474485 = score(doc=4530,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.10026272 = fieldWeight in 4530, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=4530)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Footnote
    Rez. in Mitt VÖB 64(2011) H.1, S.151-153 (S. Breitling): "Wie sieht die Rolle der Katalogisierung im 21. Jahrhundert aus? In diversen Blogs und Mailinglisten wird darüber seit geraumer Zeit diskutiert. Der Bereich Katalogisierung befindet sich in einer Phase tiefgreifenden Wandels, ausgelöst durch eine Vielzahl von Faktoren, von denen veränderte Nutzererwartungen bei der Recherche und die wachsende Menge an neuen zu katalogisierenden Materialien (e-Books, Web-Ressourcen etc.) und Formaten nur zwei Aspekte darstellen. Das technische Umfeld wird nicht zuletzt durch fortgeschrittene Möglichkeiten im Bereich Retrieval und Präsentation geprägt. Wie schafft man es, dass Katalogisierung als Teil des gesamten Bibliothekswesens relevant und zeitgemäß bleibt? Welche der in Jahrzehnten Katalogisierungspraxis erarbeiteten Standards sind erhaltenswert, und welche sind im Hinblick auf den Fortschritt der IT und ein mögliches Semantic Web vielleicht gar nicht mehr nötig oder müssen an die Gegebenheiten angepasst werden? Mit diesen und anderen Fragen beschäftigt sich die Aufsatzsammlung "Conversations with catalogers in the 21st century". In der Community bekannte Personen wie Martha Yee, Christine Schwartz oder James Weinheimer kommen zu Wort, aus dem deutschsprachigen Raum Bernhard Eversberg, Entwickler des Bibliothekssystems Allegro.
    Ein großes Thema ist erwartungsgemäß das neue Regelwerk RDA, das, um es vorwegzunehmen, bei den drei Autoren, die sich ausschließlich diesem Gesichtspunkt widmen, vorwiegend auf Kritik stößt. Erstmals publiziert wird an dieser Stelle eine Studie der Herausgeberin Elaine R. Sanchez, die ein Meinungsbild der einschlägig tätigen Bibliothekarinnen (wie z.B. Titelaufnehmerinnen, Systembibliothekarinnen) zum Umstieg auf RDA zeichnet. Wie in den anderen Kapiteln liegt auch hier der Schwerpunkt auf dem US- bzw. anglo-amerikanischen Raum, was einen Blick über den eigenen Tellerrand ermöglicht und eine Grundstimmung einfängt, der man auch in Europa und hierzulande angesichts internationaler Kooperationen und zunehmend globaler Ausrichtung bei Standards und Regelwerken Beachtung schenken sollte. Andere Beiträge setzen sich mit Themen auseinander, die ebenfalls die Rolle der Katalogisierung unter sich ständig und rasant verändernden Bedingungen betreffen: die Bedeutung von bibliographischen Standards (und Qualitätsstandards im besonderen) im Zeitalter von Google Books, das Titeldaten aus Bibliotheken "nur noch" in einem Mashup mit anderen algorithmisch aufbereiteten Daten verarbeitet; das sich wandelnde Berufsbild von Titelaufnehmerinnen, die mit traditionellen Materialien und Datenformaten arbeiten, hin zu Metadaten-Spezialisten, die sich durch Kenntnisse digitaler Objekte und der entsprechenden Formate wie etwa Dublin Core auszeichnen; Anpassung von Workflows an die technischen Möglichkeiten der Automatisierung und Digitalisierung; Anforderungen an Ausbildung und berufliche Weiterbildung von Katalogisierungsexpertinnen etc. Eine chronologische Bibliographie von Literatur mit Bezug auf Bibliotheken und Katalogisierung von 1800 bis heute beschließt den Band.
  7. ¬Der Alte Realkatalog der Staatsbibliothek ist online (2006) 0.02 
    0.02317415 = product of:
  0.034761224 = sum of:
    0.022522911 = weight(_text_:im in 4876) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022522911 = score(doc=4876,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1442303 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051022716 = queryNorm
        0.15615936 = fieldWeight in 4876, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4876)
    0.012238312 = product of:
      0.036714934 = sum of:
        0.036714934 = weight(_text_:online in 4876) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.036714934 = score(doc=4876,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.23710167 = fieldWeight in 4876, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4876)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Wissenschaftshistoriker schätzen den Alten Realkatalog (ARK) der Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin als beinahe unerschöpfliche Quelle der Information; aber auch für alle anderen historisch ausgerichteten wissenschaftlichen Disziplinen, die Literatur aus der Zeit von 1501 bis 1955 benötigen, ist der ARK von unschätzbarem Wert. Ab sofort steht dieses unverzichtbare Nachweisinstrument der internationalen Wissenschaft und Forschung online zur Verfügung: http://ark.staatsbibliothek-berlin.de
    Content
    "Der Alte Realkatalog erschließt rund drei Millionen Titel, den umfangreichsten historischen Druckschriftenbestand in einer deutschen Bibliothek, nach inhaltlich-sachlichen Kriterien. Die Bedeutung des ARK liegt nicht nur in seinem Umfang und seiner feinen Gliederung, sondern auch in seiner fachlichen, geographischen und sprachli chen Universalität begründet. Entstanden ist der rund 1800 Sachbände umfassende Katalog in der zweiten Hälfte des 19. Jahrhunderts; mit dem Erscheinungsjahr 1955 wurde er abgeschlossen, da die Weiterentwicklung der Wissenschaften eine modernere Klassifikation erforderte. Bis heute jedoch werden alle antiquarischen Neuerwerbungen der Staatsbibliothek aus dem Zeitraum 1501 bis 1955 über die ARK-Systematik erschlossen. Bislang konnten Titel, die zwischen 1501 und 1955 erschienen sind, nur auf konventionelle Weise in den Folio-Bänden beziehungsweise in der Mikrofiche-Ausgabe des Alten Realkataloges nach sachlichen Kriterien ermittelt werden. Nun kann dies mit vielfach erweiterten und verbesserten Recherchemöglichkeiten sukzessive auch auf elektronischem Wege erfolgen. Im Rahmen eines Erschließungsprojekts der Abteilung Historische Drucke wurden bereits vierzig Prozent der gesamten Systematik (darunter die Katalogteile Jurisprudenz, Kunst, Orientalische Sprachen und die so genannten Kriegsammlungen) elektronisch erfasst, sodass in ihr geblättert oder mit Suchbegriffen recherchiert werden kann; als Ergebnis werden sämtliche Titel der jeweiligen Systemstelle angezeigt. Insgesamt sind auf diese Weise schon weit über eine Million Bücher zu ermitteln. Dabei werden auch jene Titel angezeigt, die einst zum Bestand der Bibliothek gehörten, jedoch als Kriegsverlust einzustufen sind; so bleibt der bibliographische Nachweis der Werke erhalten und der ursprüngliche Sammlungszusammenhang weiterhin erkennbar."
  8. Arsenault, C.; Ménard, E.: Searching titles with initial articles in library catalogs : a case study and search behavior analysis (2007) 0.02 
    0.022972263 = product of:
  0.06891679 = sum of:
    0.06891679 = product of:
      0.10337518 = sum of:
        0.06189794 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06189794 = score(doc=2264,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.40105087 = fieldWeight in 2264, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2264)
        0.04147724 = weight(_text_:22 in 2264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04147724 = score(doc=2264,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17867287 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = 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)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    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
  9. Bowman, J.H.: ¬The catalog as barrier to retrieval : Part 1: hyphens and ampersands in titles (2000) 0.02 
    0.022100737 = product of:
  0.06630221 = sum of:
    0.06630221 = product of:
      0.09945331 = sum of:
        0.05106319 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5365) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05106319 = score(doc=5365,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.33085006 = fieldWeight in 5365, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5365)
        0.048390117 = weight(_text_:22 in 5365) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.048390117 = score(doc=5365,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17867287 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = 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)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    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.
  10. LeBlanc, J.; Kurth, M.: ¬An operational model for library metadata maintenance (2008) 0.02 
    0.019958077 = product of:
  0.05987423 = sum of:
    0.05987423 = product of:
      0.08981134 = sum of:
        0.031153653 = weight(_text_:online in 101) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031153653 = score(doc=101,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.20118743 = fieldWeight in 101, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=101)
        0.058657683 = weight(_text_:22 in 101) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.058657683 = score(doc=101,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17867287 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = 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)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Libraries pay considerable attention to the creation, preservation, and transformation of descriptive metadata in both MARC and non-MARC formats. Little evidence suggests that they devote as much time, energy, and financial resources to the ongoing maintenance of non-MARC metadata, especially with regard to updating and editing existing descriptive content, as they do to maintenance of such information in the MARC-based online public access catalog. In this paper, the authors introduce a model, derived loosely from J. A. Zachman's framework for information systems architecture, with which libraries can identify and inventory components of catalog or metadata maintenance and plan interdepartmental, even interinstitutional, workflows. The model draws on the notion that the expertise and skills that have long been the hallmark for the maintenance of libraries' catalog data can and should be parlayed towards metadata maintenance in a broader set of information delivery systems.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    19. 6.2010 19:22:28
  11. Fattahi, R.: Library cataloguing and abstracting and indexing services : reconciliation of principles in the online environment (1998) 0.02 
    0.019446231 = product of:
  0.058338694 = sum of:
    0.058338694 = product of:
      0.08750804 = sum of:
        0.051400907 = weight(_text_:online in 2587) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.051400907 = score(doc=2587,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.33194235 = fieldWeight in 2587, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2587)
        0.03610713 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2587) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03610713 = score(doc=2587,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 2587, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2587)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    With the ever-increasing developments in information technology and networks, end users of the online environment now have integrated access to a variety of bibliographic databases, mainly library catalogues and A&I services, from a single terminal. While such a facility influences users' expectations and preferences in the searching, retrieval and presentation of bibliographic information, it raises an important question as to whether different bibliographic practices can use a similar or compatible set of principles for creating bibliographic records and files. This paper is an attempt to identify areas of possible reconciliation and also address some of the implications of such an issue.
  12. Stankowski, R.H.: Bibliographic record maintenance and control in a consortium database (1990) 0.02 
    0.019446231 = product of:
  0.058338694 = sum of:
    0.058338694 = product of:
      0.08750804 = sum of:
        0.051400907 = weight(_text_:online in 502) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.051400907 = score(doc=502,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.33194235 = fieldWeight in 502, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=502)
        0.03610713 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 502) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03610713 = score(doc=502,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 502, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=502)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    When an institution wishes to automate but does not have the financial resources to implement an online integrated system, one solution is to join forces with other libraries who have similar desires and needs. Since the online database is the foundation of all library automation, a shared database will be necessary in this type of cluster environment. This article discusses some of the problems encountered when bibliographic records are shared by a number of libraries, such as difficulties in information retrieval and bibliographic control. Possible methods of dealing with the problems of joint input and database maintenance are then proposed.
  13. Morgan, E.L.: Possible solutions for incorporating digital information mediums into traditional library cataloging services (1996) 0.02 
    0.018830234 = product of:
  0.0564907 = sum of:
    0.0564907 = product of:
      0.08473605 = sum of:
        0.03634593 = weight(_text_:online in 600) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03634593 = score(doc=600,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.23471867 = fieldWeight in 600, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=600)
        0.048390117 = weight(_text_:22 in 600) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.048390117 = score(doc=600,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17867287 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 600, 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=600)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    This article first compares and contrasts the essential, fundamental differences between traditional and digital information mediums. It then reexamines the role of the online public access catalog (OPAC), refines the definition of library's catalog, and advocates the addition of Internet resources within the OPAC. Next, the article describes the building of the Alex Catalog, a catalog of Internet resources in the in the form of MARC records. Finally, this article outlines a process of integrating the futher inclusion of other Internet resources into OPACs as well as some of the obstacles such a process manifests.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) nos.3/4, S.143-170
  14. McMillan, G.: Electronic theses and dissertations : merging perspectives (1996) 0.02 
    0.018830234 = product of:
  0.0564907 = sum of:
    0.0564907 = product of:
      0.08473605 = sum of:
        0.03634593 = weight(_text_:online in 601) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03634593 = score(doc=601,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.23471867 = fieldWeight in 601, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=601)
        0.048390117 = weight(_text_:22 in 601) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.048390117 = score(doc=601,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17867287 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = 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)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    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
  15. Whitney , C.; Schiff, L.: ¬The Melvyl Recommender Project : developing library recommendation services (2006) 0.02 
    0.016649358 = product of:
  0.049948074 = sum of:
    0.049948074 = product of:
      0.07492211 = sum of:
        0.031153653 = weight(_text_:online in 1173) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031153653 = score(doc=1173,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.20118743 = fieldWeight in 1173, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1173)
        0.043768454 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1173) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043768454 = score(doc=1173,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.2835858 = fieldWeight in 1173, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1173)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Popular commercial on-line services such as Google, e-Bay, Amazon, and Netflix have evolved quickly over the last decade to help people find what they want, developing information retrieval strategies such as usefully ranked results, spelling correction, and recommender systems. Online library catalogs (OPACs), in contrast, have changed little and are notoriously difficult for patrons to use (University of California Libraries, 2005). Over the past year (June 2005 to the present), the Melvyl Recommender Project (California Digital Library, 2005) has been exploring methods and feasibility of closing the gap between features that library patrons want and have come to expect from information retrieval systems and what libraries are currently equipped to deliver. The project team conducted exploratory work in five topic areas: relevance ranking, auto-correction, use of a text-based discovery system, user interface strategies, and recommending. This article focuses specifically on the recommending portion of the project and potential extensions to that work.
  16. Barton, J.; Mak, L.: Old hopes, new possibilities : next-generation catalogues and the centralization of access (2012) 0.01 
    0.013800584 = product of:
  0.04140175 = sum of:
    0.04140175 = product of:
      0.062102623 = sum of:
        0.031153653 = weight(_text_:online in 5560) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031153653 = score(doc=5560,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.20118743 = fieldWeight in 5560, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5560)
        0.03094897 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5560) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03094897 = score(doc=5560,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 5560, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5560)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Next-generation catalogues can be viewed as the latest manifestation of a tendency in library catalogue history to strive for centralization of access to collections-a single portal for the discovery of library resources. Due to an increasing volume of published materials and the explosion of online information resources during the Internet age, the library does not currently provide centralized access to its various information silos, nor does it provide a user-friendly search and retrieval experience for users whose expectations are shaped by Google and other major commercial Web sites. Searching across library resources is a complicated task, bearing high-attention "transaction costs" for the user, which discourage the use of library resources. Libraries need access systems that minimize complexity, easing discovery and delivery of resources for user populations. Here, the authors review past efforts of centralization of access, consider the potential of next-generation catalogues in the context of this historical tendency toward centralization of access, and describe what goals underlie that centralization.
  17. Stoker, D.: Computer cataloguing in retrospect (1997) 0.01 
    0.013412262 = product of:
  0.040236786 = sum of:
    0.040236786 = product of:
      0.06035518 = sum of:
        0.025790809 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 605) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025790809 = score(doc=605,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 605, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=605)
        0.03456437 = weight(_text_:22 in 605) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03456437 = score(doc=605,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17867287 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 605, 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=605)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Pays tribute to the recent advances in the ability to access computerized catalogues from the desktop via the Internet but emphasizes that there are problems still to be overcome before the ideal of universal access to catalogue records for UK libraries is achieved. Advances in computerized cataloguing over the past 40 years have been an obstacle to retrospective cataloguing in a coherent and standardized manner which even the adoption of common standards for information retrieval and the Z39.50 protocol have failed to prevent. Many libraries with modern methods for cataloguing new materials still have earlier sequences of records on microfiche or other hard copy format. Other specialized collections are such that they have never been catalogued to professional standards or in a convenient format. Illustrates the point with reference to practical searching of catalogues in Aberystwyth, Wales, and to 2 studies of the logistical and financial issues of a programme of retrospective cataloguing as reported in BLRIC report 53. Discusses the proposed UK coordinating body and coordinated natioanl prgramme, to select which catalogues should be converted, set priorities for work, ensure maintenance of requisite standards, and arrange collaboration between neighbouring or related institutions
    Date
    9. 2.1997 18:44:22
  18. Jaffe, L.: ¬The future of the online catalog : who decides? (1991) 0.01 
    0.0130541995 = product of:
  0.0391626 = sum of:
    0.0391626 = product of:
      0.11748779 = sum of:
        0.11748779 = weight(_text_:online in 3878) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11748779 = score(doc=3878,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.75872535 = fieldWeight in 3878, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=3878)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Online. 15(1991) no.1, S.7-9
  19. DeZelar-Tiedman, V.: Doing the LibraryThing(TM) in an academic library catalog (2008) 0.01 
    0.012671877 = product of:
  0.03801563 = sum of:
    0.03801563 = product of:
      0.057023443 = sum of:
        0.029371947 = weight(_text_:online in 2666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029371947 = score(doc=2666,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.18968134 = fieldWeight in 2666, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2666)
        0.027651496 = weight(_text_:22 in 2666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027651496 = score(doc=2666,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17867287 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = 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)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    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
  20. Hafter, R.: ¬The performance of card catalogs : a review of research (1979) 0.01 
    0.012289554 = product of:
  0.03686866 = sum of:
    0.03686866 = product of:
      0.110605985 = sum of:
        0.110605985 = weight(_text_:22 in 3069) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.110605985 = score(doc=3069,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17867287 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 3069, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=3069)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Date
    3.10.2000 20:48:22

Authors

Years

Types

  • a 81
  • el 6
  • m 5
  • s 5
  • b 3
  • r 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications