Search (13 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Datenformate"
  • × theme_ss:"Formalerschließung"
  • × type_ss:"a"
  • × year_i:[1990 TO 2000}
  1. Ranta, J.A.: Queens Borough Public Library's Guidelines for cataloging community information (1996) 0.04
    0.03509323 = product of:
      0.07018646 = sum of:
        0.04641878 = weight(_text_:library in 6523) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04641878 = score(doc=6523,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.3522223 = fieldWeight in 6523, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6523)
        0.023767682 = product of:
          0.047535364 = sum of:
            0.047535364 = weight(_text_:22 in 6523) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.047535364 = score(doc=6523,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 6523, 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=6523)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Currently, few resources exist to guide libraries in the cataloguing of community information using the new USMARC Format for Cammunity Information (1993). In developing a community information database, Queens Borough Public Library, New York City, formulated their own cataloguing procedures for applying AACR2, LoC File Interpretations, and USMARC Format for Community Information to community information. Their practices include entering corporate names directly whenever possible and assigning LC subject headings for classes of persons and topics, adding neighbourhood level geographic subdivisions. The guidelines were specially designed to aid non cataloguers in cataloguing community information and have enabled library to maintain consistency in handling corporate names and in assigning subject headings, while creating database that is highly accessible to library staff and users
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) no.2, S.51-69
  2. Eliot, J.: MARC and OPAC systems : discussion document (1994) 0.04
    0.035046883 = product of:
      0.070093766 = sum of:
        0.030628446 = weight(_text_:library in 10) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030628446 = score(doc=10,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 10, 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=10)
        0.039465316 = product of:
          0.07893063 = sum of:
            0.07893063 = weight(_text_:project in 10) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07893063 = score(doc=10,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.37308553 = fieldWeight in 10, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=10)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    A discussion document produced following a meeting the Users of Book Industry Standards (UBIS) Bibliographic Standards Working Group at the University of London as part of a project to consider the Survey on the use of UK-MARC by Russell Sweeney published in 1991 by the British Library National Bibliographic Service. Considers the suitability, or otherwise, of the UKMARC format for use in OPACs. Summarizes the issues involved, discussing: the UKMARC exchange format, tagging and coding structure (record complexity, analytical entries, non filing indicators), data content (statements of responsibility, main versus added entry) and records standards
  3. Fattahi, R.: ¬A uniform approach to the indexing of cataloguing data in online library systems (1997) 0.01
    0.011485667 = product of:
      0.045942668 = sum of:
        0.045942668 = weight(_text_:library in 131) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045942668 = score(doc=131,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.34860963 = fieldWeight in 131, 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=131)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Argues that in library cataloguing and for optional functionality of bibliographic records the indexing of fields and subfields should follow a uniform approach. This would maintain effectiveness in searching, retrieval and display of bibliographic information both within systems and between systems. However, a review of different postings to the AUTOCAT and USMARC discussion lists indicates that the indexing and tagging of cataloguing data do not, at present, follow a consistent approach in online library systems. If the rationale of cataloguing principles is to bring uniformity in bibliographic description and effectiveness in access, they should also address the question of uniform approaches to the indexing of cataloguing data. In this context and in terms of the identification and handling of data elements, cataloguing standards (codes, MARC formats and the Z39.50 standard) should be brought closer, in that they should provide guidelines for the designation of data elements for machine readable records
    Source
    Library review. 46(1997) no.5, S.339-343
  4. Hopkins, J.: USMARC as metadata shell (1999) 0.01
    0.009866329 = product of:
      0.039465316 = sum of:
        0.039465316 = product of:
          0.07893063 = sum of:
            0.07893063 = weight(_text_:project in 933) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07893063 = score(doc=933,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.37308553 = fieldWeight in 933, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=933)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    This paper introduces the two concepts of Content and Coding which together define Metadata. The encoding scheme used to hold the data content is referred to as a shell. One such shell is the MARC format. In this paper I describe the MARC format and its application to Internet resources, primarily through the OCLC-sponsored Intercat Project
  5. Frias, J.A.: ¬La estructura conceptual del registro bibliografico : una revision (1996) 0.01
    0.009475192 = product of:
      0.03790077 = sum of:
        0.03790077 = weight(_text_:library in 4618) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03790077 = score(doc=4618,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.28758827 = fieldWeight in 4618, 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=4618)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    It is assumed that the conceptual structure of bibliographic records is based on the knowledge of user needs. In applying the entity-relationship model to the library catalogue the authority file and bibliographic records can be viewed as attributes, and the links between records and elements as relationships. Outlines the bibliographic relationships of the UNIMARC format, the analysis of hierarchical relationships carried out by Goosens and Mazur-Rzesos, and the typology of bibliographic documents established by McCallum. Presents 7 types of relationships developed by Tillet and gives results of an empirical study carried out to establish the extent and features of bibliographic relationships in the computerized catalogue of the Library of Congress
  6. Leazer, G.H.: Recent research on the sequential bibliographic relationship and its implications for standards and the library catalog : an examination of serials (1996) 0.01
    0.009475192 = product of:
      0.03790077 = sum of:
        0.03790077 = weight(_text_:library in 5579) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03790077 = score(doc=5579,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.28758827 = fieldWeight in 5579, 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=5579)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Evaluates current research into bibliographic relationships sparked off by B.B. Tillett's taxonomy of bibliographic relationships (LRTS 35(1991) no.4, S.393-405) and R.P. Smiraglia's taxonomy of the derivative bibliographic relationship (PhD dissertation, Chicago Univ., Graduate Library School, 1992). These researches provide the context for a discussion of recent research and standards work. Reevaluates research on the sequential relationship drawn from work conducted on periodicals and the implications of that research is applied to cataloguing system design. Evaluates the conceptual designs proposed by researchers such as G.H. Leazer and M. Gorman's and uses them in a critique of the USMARC format for bibliographic description
  7. Wool, G.J.; Austhof, B.: Cataloguing standards and machine translation : a study of reformatted ISBD records in an online catalog (1993) 0.01
    0.0076571116 = product of:
      0.030628446 = sum of:
        0.030628446 = weight(_text_:library in 7321) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030628446 = score(doc=7321,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 7321, 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=7321)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Labelled bibliographic display screens in online catalogues can repackage records created for card catalogues in ways that restructure the records, redefine data categories and contexts, and add or omit selected categories of data. Reports on a study of the impact of automated display on catalogue records in a medium-sized research library by comparing the card and online version of 1.005 records created according to the ISBD conventions
  8. Ede, S.: Fitness for purpose : the future evolution of bibliographic records and their delivery (1995) 0.01
    0.0076571116 = product of:
      0.030628446 = sum of:
        0.030628446 = weight(_text_:library in 3086) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030628446 = score(doc=3086,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 3086, 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=3086)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Uses some of the bibliographic records initiatives in which the British Library is involved to illustrate the developments in bibliographic records and their provision. Traces past experiences and covers: efforts at enhancing content, expanding coverage, format simplification, and international exchange. Outlines the aims of the CoBRA initiative and the National Bibliographic Database
  9. Tillett, B.: Cataloguing rules and conceptual models for the electronic environment (1995) 0.01
    0.0076571116 = product of:
      0.030628446 = sum of:
        0.030628446 = weight(_text_:library in 5754) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030628446 = score(doc=5754,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 5754, 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=5754)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Offers the conceptual modelling technique as a means of analysing the future of library cataloguing with regard to cataloguing rules and MARC formats. Discusses the evolution of publishing technology and introduces the conceptual model that the IFLA is preparing in its study of the functional requirements of bibliographic records. Considers the purpose of cataloguing rules and how they have evolved in response to changes in technologies. Examines the future of cataloguing with future rules and alternative communication formats
  10. Crook, M.: Barbara Tillett discusses cataloging rules and conceptual models (1996) 0.01
    0.0059419204 = product of:
      0.023767682 = sum of:
        0.023767682 = product of:
          0.047535364 = sum of:
            0.047535364 = weight(_text_:22 in 7683) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.047535364 = score(doc=7683,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 7683, 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=7683)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    OCLC newsletter. 1996, no.220, S.20-22
  11. Giordano, R.: ¬The documentation of electronic texts : using Text Encoding Initiative headers: an introduction (1994) 0.01
    0.0057428335 = product of:
      0.022971334 = sum of:
        0.022971334 = weight(_text_:library in 866) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022971334 = score(doc=866,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.17430481 = fieldWeight in 866, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=866)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 38(1994) no.4, S.389-401
  12. Have, B.T.: Format integration : where are we? Report of the meeting of the ALCTS/LITA Serials Automation Interest Group, American Library Association, Midwinter Meeting, Los Angeles, February 1994 (1994) 0.01
    0.0057428335 = product of:
      0.022971334 = sum of:
        0.022971334 = weight(_text_:library in 2396) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022971334 = score(doc=2396,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.17430481 = fieldWeight in 2396, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2396)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
  13. Fattahi, R.: Anglo American Cataloguing Rules in an online environment : a literature review (1995) 0.01
    0.0057428335 = product of:
      0.022971334 = sum of:
        0.022971334 = weight(_text_:library in 596) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022971334 = score(doc=596,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.17430481 = fieldWeight in 596, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=596)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    As a standard set of rules, AACR2 has received much attention in the literature of descriptive cataloguing. Considers that despite this extensive literature, an important aspect of the code, namely its relevance to the online environment, has not received much attention, particularly in terms of empirical research. Notes however that there is a general criticism that AACR2, being based on manual systems, does not correspond effectively to the online environment. From a review of the literature concludes that while the advent of online catalogues has changed both the internal structure and external appearance of library catalogues, a mojority of writers consider that radical changes in the code are impossible and undesirable in the near future, owing to various factors such as the belief that that MARC format is not conductive to radical change and the large size of existing catalogues created according to the current rules