Search (101 results, page 2 of 6)

  • × theme_ss:"Datenformate"
  • × theme_ss:"Formalerschließung"
  • × type_ss:"a"
  1. Syré, L.: AACR2: Stellungnahme der AG Regionalbibliographie (2002) 0.01 
    0.0061156014 = product of:
  0.015289003 = sum of:
    0.002724461 = weight(_text_:a in 841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.002724461 = score(doc=841,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.050957955 = fieldWeight in 841, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=841)
    0.012564542 = product of:
      0.025129084 = sum of:
        0.025129084 = weight(_text_:22 in 841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025129084 = score(doc=841,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 841, 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=841)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Content
    "Die Mitglieder der Arbeitsgruppe Regionalbibliographie in der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Regionalbibliotheken (DBV Sektion 4) haben auf ihrer Jahrestagung am 22. und 23. April 2002 in Bautzen einen etwaigen Umstieg von RAK auf AACR2 beraten und sich einstimmig dagegen ausgesprochen. - Begründung - Der personelle, technische und finanzielle Aufwand für den Umstieg wäre für die Landes- und Regionalbibliographien gewaltig. Diejenigen Bibliographien, die ihre eigenen Datenbanken unterhalten, müssten diese sowohl vollständig EDV-technisch (z.B. hinsichtlich des Datenformats) anpassen als auch sämtliche Änderungen (z.B. bei Zeitschriftenaufnahmen, bei der Ansetzung von Körperschaften) nachführen. Dies ist umso schwerwiegender, als nicht alle Bibliographie- Datenbanken über entsprechende eigene Normdateien verfügen. Alle Landes- und Regionalbibliographien, also auch diejenigen, die in die Verbunddatenbanken integriert sind, wären überdies vom zusätzlichen Schulungsaufwand für das neue Regelwerk sowie von Revisionsarbeiten an den Normdateien betroffen. Weitere Nachteile wären Inkonsistenzen im Datenbestand bzw. Qualitätsverluste bei der Konvertierung der Altdaten. Diesen schwerwiegenden Nachteilen steht kein ersichtlicher Vorteil bei Erstellung oder Benutzung der Landes- und Regionalbibliographien gegenüber: Der Rationalisierungseffekt ist unbedeutend, da in Regionalbibliographien ganz überwiegend unselbstständige deutschsprachige Titel verzeichnet werden, für die keine Katalogisate aus AACR-Ländern genutzt werden können. Auch für die Benutzer der Datenbanken steht keine Verbesserung der Rechercheergebnisse zu erwarten. Die Landes- und Regionalbibliographien sehen sich derzeit einer Vielzahl von Aufgaben und neuen Herausforderungen gegenüber, die sie mit bestenfalls stagnierendem Personalstand zu erfüllen haben: Neben einer stetig wachsenden Titelzahl sind dies z.B. die neuen Publikationsformen im WWW, der Aufbau eines gemeinsamen Suchinstruments ("Virtuelle Deutsche Landesbibliographie° in KVK-Technik) und die Integration der noch konventionell vorliegenden älteren Bibliographienachweise in die Datenbanken. In dieser Situation wäre es kontraproduktiv, wenn enorme Ressourcen für einen Regelwerks- und Formatwechsel ohne praktischen Nutzen abgezogen würden. Die AG Regionalbibliographie lehnt daher einen Umstieg auf AACR2 ab. Sie empfiehlt stattdessen, das bestehende Regelwerk weiterzuentwickeln sowie alternative und zeitgemäße Methoden zu erarbeiten, um die internationale Zusammenarbeit zu verbessern (z.B. durch das Projekt "Virtuelle internationale Normdatei")."
    Type
    a
  2. Boruah, B.B.; Ravikumar, S.; Gayang, F.L.: Consistency, extent, and validation of the utilization of the MARC 21 bibliographic standard in the college libraries of Assam in India (2023) 0.01 
    0.005822873 = product of:
  0.014557183 = sum of:
    0.0067426977 = weight(_text_:a in 1183) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0067426977 = score(doc=1183,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 1183, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1183)
    0.007814486 = product of:
      0.015628971 = sum of:
        0.015628971 = weight(_text_:information in 1183) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015628971 = score(doc=1183,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 1183, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1183)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    This paper brings light to the existing practice of cataloging in the college libraries of Assam in terms of utilizing the MARC 21 standard and its structure, i.e., the tags, subfield codes, and indicators. Catalog records from six college libraries are collected and a survey is conducted to understand the local users' information requirements for the catalog. Places, where libraries have scope to improve and which divisions of tags could be more helpful for them in information retrieval, are identified and suggested. This study fulfilled the need for local-level assessment of the catalogs.
    Type
    a
  3. Witt, M.; Leresche, F.: IFLA study on functional requirements for bibliographic records : cataloguing practice in France (1995) 0.01 
    0.0056083994 = product of:
  0.014020998 = sum of:
    0.00770594 = weight(_text_:a in 3081) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00770594 = score(doc=3081,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 3081, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3081)
    0.006315058 = product of:
      0.012630116 = sum of:
        0.012630116 = weight(_text_:information in 3081) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012630116 = score(doc=3081,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 3081, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3081)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Discusses the French reaction. Covers the entities considered for cataloguing; elements for identifying a document; access points; and authority records. Considers whether it is possible to reduce redundancies among the elements contained in bibliographic records caused by overlapping between the ISBD description, the access points and the coded information; and whether OPACs can be developed to present clearly to users various entities from the most general level to the most specific level
    Type
    a
  4. German, L.: Bibliographic utilities (2009) 0.01 
    0.0056083994 = product of:
  0.014020998 = sum of:
    0.00770594 = weight(_text_:a in 3858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00770594 = score(doc=3858,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 3858, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3858)
    0.006315058 = product of:
      0.012630116 = sum of:
        0.012630116 = weight(_text_:information in 3858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012630116 = score(doc=3858,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 3858, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3858)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Bibliographic utilities have been in existence for more than 40 years. From the beginning, they were designed to promote resource sharing among their members. The core of a bibliographic utility is the database of bibliographic records. The structure of the bibliographic record is based upon Machine Readable Cataloging (MARC). Other services have evolved from the utilities' bibliographic database.
    Source
    Encyclopedia of library and information sciences. 3rd ed. Ed.: M.J. Bates
    Type
    a
  5. Fattahi, R.: ¬A uniform approach to the indexing of cataloguing data in online library systems (1997) 0.01 
    0.005549766 = product of:
  0.013874415 = sum of:
    0.009138121 = weight(_text_:a in 131) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009138121 = score(doc=131,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 131, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=131)
    0.0047362936 = product of:
      0.009472587 = sum of:
        0.009472587 = weight(_text_:information in 131) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009472587 = score(doc=131,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 131, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=131)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    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
    Type
    a
  6. Heaney, M.: Object-oriented cataloging (1995) 0.01 
    0.005513504 = product of:
  0.01378376 = sum of:
    0.008258085 = weight(_text_:a in 3339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008258085 = score(doc=3339,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.1544581 = fieldWeight in 3339, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3339)
    0.005525676 = product of:
      0.011051352 = sum of:
        0.011051352 = weight(_text_:information in 3339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011051352 = score(doc=3339,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 3339, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3339)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Catalogues have evolved from lists of physical items present in particular libraries into computerized access and retrieval tools for works dispersed across local and national boundaries. Works themselves are no longer constrained by physical form yet cataloguing rules have not evolved in parallel with these developments. Reanalyzes the nature of works and their publication in an approach based on object oriented modelling and demonstrates the advantages to be gained thereby. Suggests a strategic plan to enable an organic transformation to be made from current MARC based cataloguing to object oriented cataloguing. Proposes major revisions of MARC in order to allow records to maximize the benefits of both computerized databases and high speed data networks. This will involve a fundamental shift away from the AACR philosophy of description of, plus access to, physical items
    Source
    Information technology and libraries. 14(1995) no.3, S.135-153
    Type
    a
  7. Oehlschläger, S.: Aus der 49. Sitzung der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme am 23. und 24. November 2005 in Köln (2006) 0.01 
    0.0051233517 = product of:
  0.012808379 = sum of:
    0.0017027882 = weight(_text_:a in 632) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0017027882 = score(doc=632,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.03184872 = fieldWeight in 632, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=632)
    0.0111055905 = product of:
      0.022211181 = sum of:
        0.022211181 = weight(_text_:22 in 632) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022211181 = score(doc=632,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.13679022 = fieldWeight in 632, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=632)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Content
    MARC21 als Austauschformat Die Expertengruppe Datenformate hat in ihrer 5. Sitzung am 22. November 2005 die Frage der Hierarchienabbildung bei der Übernahme von MARC 21 weiter diskutiert und einer Lösung zugeführt. Für einen geringen Prozentsatz der Daten werden trotz Vorarbeiten der Expertengruppe Probleme bei der Überführung von MARC-21-Daten in MAB2-Strukturen gesehen. Es wurde darauf hingewiesen, dass es im Zusammenhang mit dem Umstieg auf MARC 21 ebenso wie bei der kooperativen Katalogisierung notwendig ist, gemeinsame Regeln festzulegen und Absprachen zwischen den Verbünden zu treffen. Eine unterschiedliche Handhabung des Formats sollte sich von vornherein verbieten. Projekt Kooperative Neukatalogisierung Die Projektgruppe hat zweimal getagt, zuletzt am 3. November 2005. Es liegen erste Ergebnisse vor, und spätestens Anfang Januar 2006 soll das Verfahren erprobt werden. Alle Verbünde signalisieren ihr Interesse an dem geplanten Verfahren, da die Eigenkatalogisierungsrate nach wie vor zu hoch ist. Für die Akzeptanz des Dienstes, der auch zum Synchronisieren der vorhandenen Aufnahmen und zum Austausch von Sacherschließungsdaten genutzt werden soll, ist die Aktualität des geplanten Neukatalogisierungspools essentiell. Ein weiteres Ziel ist auch die Optimierung der Arbeitsabläufe zwischen Verbundzentrale und Bibliotheken. Catalogue Enrichment Zur Anreicherung der Katalogdaten gibt es verschiedene Aktivitäten innerhalb der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme, die koordiniert werden müssen, damit eine Mehrfachdigitalisierung von Inhaltsverzeichnissen, Abstracts und anderen Objekten vermieden werden kann. Die Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme beschließt, eine kleine Arbeitsgruppe einzusetzen, die bis spätestens Anfang Februar 2006 einen Vorschlag mit unterschiedlichen Szenarien für unterschiedliche Umgebungen vorlegen soll. Aufgabe der AG Datenanreicherung ist die Konzeption eines schnellen Dienstes für die Digitalisierung von Abstracts und Inhaltsverzeichnissen sofern sie lizenzrechtlich frei verfügbar sind, die allen Verbünden zur Verfügung gestellt werden sollen. Dazu gehören eine Übersicht über die vorhandenen Daten und eine ausgearbeitete Verfahrensvorschrift für das künftige Vorgehen.
    DDC/Melvil-Nutzungs- und Lizenzsituation Die Deutsche Bibliothek hat den Dienst Melvil vorgestellt, der auf der im Rahmen des Projektes DDC Deutsch erstellten deutschen Übersetzung der 22. Ausgabe der DDC basiert, und die Such- und Sprachgewohnheiten deutschsprachiger Benutzerinnen und Benutzer berücksichtigt. Mit Melvil wurde ein Online-Dienst entwickelt, der Bibliotheken und Informationseinrichtungen außer einem an WebDewey orientierten Klassifikationstool MelvilClass auch ein Retrievaltool MelvilSearch für die verbale Suche nach DDC-erschlossenen Dokumenten und das Browsing in der DDC-Hierarchie zur Verfügung stellt. Über die Schnittstelle MelvilSoap können Bibliotheken und Verbundzentralen, die den Dienst Melvil lizenziert haben, auch DDC-Daten zur weiteren Nutzung herunterladen. Gegenwärtig vergibt Die Deutsche Bibliothek Testlizenzen, ab 2006 kann der Dienst nach einem gestaffelten Modell kostenpflichtig genutzt werden Ergebnisse der Adhoc-Arbeitsgruppe ISBD(CR) Der Standardisierungsausschuss hatte in seiner 9. Sitzung am 15. Dezember 2004 die Anpassung der Splitregeln bei fortlaufenden Sammelwerken an die ISBD(CR) mit dem Ziel der Übernahme beschlossen. Im Januar 2005 richtete die Arbeitsstelle für Standardisierung eine Ad-hoc-AG ISBD(CR) ein, in der Vertreter der ZDB, der Expertengruppe Formalerschließung und der AGDBT (Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Datenbankteilnehmer der ZDB) unter der Federführung der Arbeitsstelle für Standardisierung zusammenarbeiteten. Auftragsgemäß konnte dem Standardisierungsausschuss am 2. August 2005 ein entscheidungsreifer Entwurf zur Anwendung der ISBD(CR)-Splitregeln für fortlaufende Sammelwerke vorgelegt werden. Die Unterlage, die dem Standardisierungsausschuss zu seiner 11. Sitzung am 1. Dezember 2005 zugeleitet wurde, wurde den Mitgliedern der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme im Vorfeld der Sitzung zur Kenntnis gegeben. Die zeitnahe Anwendung der ISBD(CR)-Splitregeln würde nicht nur in einem kleinen abgeschlossenen Bereich eine Angleichung an internationale Gepflogenheiten bedeuten, sondern sie hätte auch einige positive Auswirkungen auf die von Zeitschriftentiteln abhängigen ergänzenden Dienstleistungen. So würde z.B. die Verlinkung mit SFX-Diensten erheblich erleichtert."
    Type
    a
  8. Maxwell, R.L.: Bibliographic control (2009) 0.00 
    0.0049910345 = product of:
  0.012477586 = sum of:
    0.005779455 = weight(_text_:a in 3750) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005779455 = score(doc=3750,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.10809815 = fieldWeight in 3750, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3750)
    0.0066981306 = product of:
      0.013396261 = sum of:
        0.013396261 = weight(_text_:information in 3750) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013396261 = score(doc=3750,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 3750, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3750)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Bibliographic control is the process of creation, exchange, preservation, and use of data about information resources. Formal bibliographic control has been practiced for millennia, but modern techniques began to be developed and implemented in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. A series of cataloging codes characterized this period. These codes governed the creation of library catalogs, first in book form, then on cards, and finally in electronic formats, including MAchine-Readable Cataloging (MARC). The period was also characterized by the rise of shared cataloging programs, allowing the development of resource-saving copy cataloging procedures. Such programs were assisted by the development of cataloging networks such as OCLC and RLG. The twentieth century saw progress in the theory of bibliographic control, including the 1961 Paris Principles, culminating with the early twenty-first century Statement of International Cataloguing Principles and IFLA's Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR). Toward the end of the period bibliographic control began to be applied to newly invented electronic media, as "metadata." Trends point toward continued development of collaborative and international approaches to bibliographic control.
    Source
    Encyclopedia of library and information sciences. 3rd ed. Ed.: M.J. Bates
    Type
    a
  9. Zapounidou, S.; Sfakakis, M.; Papatheodorou, C.: Library data integration : towards BIBFRAME mapping to EDM (2014) 0.00 
    0.0049910345 = product of:
  0.012477586 = sum of:
    0.005779455 = weight(_text_:a in 1589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005779455 = score(doc=1589,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.10809815 = fieldWeight in 1589, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1589)
    0.0066981306 = product of:
      0.013396261 = sum of:
        0.013396261 = weight(_text_:information in 1589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013396261 = score(doc=1589,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 1589, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1589)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Integration of library data into the Linked Data environment is a key issue in libraries and is approached on the basis of interoperability between library data conceptual models. Achieving interoperability for different representations of the same or related entities between the library and cultural heritage domains shall enhance rich bibliographic data reusability and support the development of new data-driven information services. This paper aims to contribute to the desired interoperability by attempting to map core semantic paths between the BIBFRAME and EDM conceptual models. BIBFRAME is developed by the Library of Congress to support transformation of legacy library data in MARC format into linked data. EDM is the model developed for and used in the Europeana Cultural Heritage aggregation portal.
    Series
    Communications in computer and information science; 478
    Type
    a
  10. Krischker, U.: Formale Analyse (Erfassung) von Dokumenten (1990) 0.00 
    0.0047055925 = product of:
  0.011763981 = sum of:
    0.005448922 = weight(_text_:a in 1535) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005448922 = score(doc=1535,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 1535, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1535)
    0.006315058 = product of:
      0.012630116 = sum of:
        0.012630116 = weight(_text_:information in 1535) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012630116 = score(doc=1535,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 1535, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1535)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Source
    Grundlagen der praktischen Information und Dokumentation: ein Handbuch zur Einführung in die fachliche Informationsarbeit. 3. Aufl. Hrsg.: M. Buder u.a. Bd.1
    Type
    a
  11. Xu, A.; Hess, K.; Akerman, L.: From MARC to BIBFRAME 2.0 : Crosswalks (2018) 0.00 
    0.004624805 = product of:
  0.011562012 = sum of:
    0.0076151006 = weight(_text_:a in 5172) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0076151006 = score(doc=5172,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.14243183 = fieldWeight in 5172, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5172)
    0.003946911 = product of:
      0.007893822 = sum of:
        0.007893822 = weight(_text_:information in 5172) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007893822 = score(doc=5172,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 5172, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5172)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    One of the big challenges facing academic libraries today is to increase the relevance of the libraries to their user communities. If the libraries can increase the visibility of their resources on the open web, it will increase the chances of the libraries to reach to their user communities via the user's first search experience. BIBFRAME and library Linked Data will enable libraries to publish their resources in a way that the Web understands, consume Linked Data to enrich their resources relevant to the libraries' user communities, and visualize networks across collections. However, one of the important steps for transitioning to BIBFRAME and library Linked Data involves crosswalks, mapping MARC fields and subfields across data models and performing necessary data reformatting to be in compliance with the specifications of the new model, which is currently BIBFRAME 2.0. This article looks into how the Library of Congress has mapped library bibliographic data from the MARC format to the BIBFRAME 2.0 model and vocabulary published and updated since April 2016, available from http://www.loc.gov/bibframe/docs/index.html based on the recently released conversion specifications and converter, developed by the Library of Congress with input from many community members. The BIBFRAME 2.0 standard and conversion tools will enable libraries to transform bibliographic data from MARC into BIBFRAME 2.0, which introduces a Linked Data model as the improved method of bibliographic control for the future, and make bibliographic information more useful within and beyond library communities.
    Footnote
    Beitrag in einem Heft: 'Setting standards to work and live by: A memorial Festschrift for Valerie Bross'.
    Type
    a
  12. Aalberg, T.; Zumer, M.: ¬The value of MARC data, or, challenges of frbrisation (2013) 0.00 
    0.004096731 = product of:
  0.010241828 = sum of:
    0.0034055763 = weight(_text_:a in 1769) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0034055763 = score(doc=1769,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.06369744 = fieldWeight in 1769, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1769)
    0.006836252 = product of:
      0.013672504 = sum of:
        0.013672504 = weight(_text_:information in 1769) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013672504 = score(doc=1769,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 1769, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1769)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Purpose - Bibliographic records should now be used in innovative end-user applications that enable users to learn about, discover and exploit available content, and this information should be interpreted and reused also beyond the library domain. New conceptual models such as FRBR offer the foundation for such developments. The main motivation for this research is to contribute to the adoption of the FRBR model in future bibliographic standards and systems, by analysing limitations in existing bibliographic information and looking for short- and long-term solutions that can improve the data quality in terms of expressing the FRBR model. Design/methodology/approach - MARC records in three collections (BIBSYS catalogue, Slovenian National Bibliography and BTJ catalogue) were first analysed by looking at statistics of field and subfield usage to determine common patterns that express FRBR. Based on this, different rules for interpreting the information were developed. Finally typical problems/errors found in MARC records were analysed. Findings - Different types of FRBR entity-relationship structures that typically can be found in bibliographic records are identified. Problems related to interpreting these from bibliographic records are analyzed. Frbrisation of consistent and complete MARC records is relatively successful, particularly if all entities are systematically described and relationships among them are clearly indicated. Research limitations/implications - Advanced matching was not used for clustering of identical entities. Practical implications - Cataloguing guidelines are proposed to enable better frbrisation of MARC records in the interim period, before new formats are developed and implemented. Originality/value - This is the first in depth analysis of manifestations embodying several expressions and of works and agents as subjects.
    Type
    a
  13. Oehlschläger, S.: Aus der 47. Sitzung der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme am 3. und 4. November 2004 in Wien (2005) 0.00 
    0.0038222508 = product of:
  0.009555627 = sum of:
    0.0017027882 = weight(_text_:a in 3124) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0017027882 = score(doc=3124,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.03184872 = fieldWeight in 3124, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3124)
    0.007852838 = product of:
      0.015705677 = sum of:
        0.015705677 = weight(_text_:22 in 3124) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015705677 = score(doc=3124,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.09672529 = fieldWeight in 3124, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3124)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Date
    22. 1.2005 18:53:53
    Type
    a
  14. Krischker, U.: Formale Analyse von Dokumenten (1997) 0.00 
    0.003529194 = product of:
  0.008822985 = sum of:
    0.004086692 = weight(_text_:a in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004086692 = score(doc=3925,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.07643694 = fieldWeight in 3925, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3925)
    0.0047362936 = product of:
      0.009472587 = sum of:
        0.009472587 = weight(_text_:information in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009472587 = score(doc=3925,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 3925, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3925)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Source
    Grundlagen der praktischen Information und Dokumentation: ein Handbuch zur Einführung in die fachliche Informationsarbeit. 4. Aufl. Hrsg.: M. Buder u.a
    Type
    a
  15. Oehlschläger, S.: Treffpunkt Standardisierung : Eine Veranstaltung des Standardisierungsausschusses beim 2. Leipziger Kongress für Information und Bibliothek (2004) 0.00 
    0.003277385 = product of:
  0.008193462 = sum of:
    0.002724461 = weight(_text_:a in 2790) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.002724461 = score(doc=2790,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.050957955 = fieldWeight in 2790, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2790)
    0.0054690014 = product of:
      0.010938003 = sum of:
        0.010938003 = weight(_text_:information in 2790) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010938003 = score(doc=2790,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.1343758 = fieldWeight in 2790, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2790)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Treffpunkt Standardisierung - Projekte, Konzepte und Kooperationen - lautete der Titel der Veranstaltung des Standardisierungsausschusses beim 2. Leipziger Kongress für Information und Bibliothek »Information Macht Bildung«, die vom Vorsitzenden Berndt Dugall moderiert wurde. Den größten Raum innerhalb der Veranstaltung nahm der Themenkomplex »Umstieg auf internationale Formate und Regelwerke (MARC21, AACR2)« ein. Zunächst stellte die Projektbearbeiterin Luise Hoffmann die Ausgangslage des Projektes sowie bisher vorliegende Ergebnisse aus dem von der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) geförderten Projekt vor und ging dabei auf einige Projektschwerpunkte ein: Luise Hoffmann stellte einige Punkte aus dem Regelwerks- und Formatabgleich sowie der Untersuchung über die Konsequenzen eines Umstiegs auf die laufende Katalogisierung vor und ging dann ausführlicher auf mögliche Auswirkungen eines Umstiegs auf die Informationsversorgung des Benutzers ein, einen Aspekt, dem im DFG-Antrag eine besondere, hervorgehobene Bedeutung beigemessen wird. In erster Linie wurden die Strategien der Benutzer zur Literatursuche untersucht. Ziel war es, herauszufinden, ob und welche Auswirkungen ein Umstieg auf die Benutzung des örtlichen Bibliothekskatalogs haben würde. Hierzu wurde zunächst die Suchstrategie von Benutzern ermittelt, um anschließend analysieren zu können, ob diese Strategie in einem AACR-MARC-basierten Katalog erfolgreicher oder weniger erfolgreich gewesen wäre. Da die zunehmende Literaturrecherche im Internet möglicherweise das Suchverhalten in einem OPAC beeinflusst, wurde zusätzlich die Suchstrategie im Internet erfragt. Zur Ermittlung der Suchstrategie wurde ein Fragebogen entworfen und in Der Deutschen Bibliothek getestet. Anhand der Deutschen Bibliotheksstatistik wurden Bibliotheken unter den Gesichtspunkten der Nutzerfrequenz und der Bestandsgröße ausgewählt und angefragt, ob sie bereit wären, den Fragebogen in ihrer Bibliothek auszulegen. Nachdem sich zehn Bibliotheken bereit erklärt hatten, wurden für die endgültige Befragung einige spezielle Fragen zu Suchbegriffen an die jeweiligen Bibliotheks-OPACs angepasst, da Formulierungen und Bezeichnungen wie Person, Autor, Verfasser u. dgl. in den Bibliothekskatalogen voneinander abweichen können. Als erstes Ergebnis nach Auswertung der Fragebögen aus drei Universitätsbibliotheken konnte festgestellt werden, dass Benutzer überwiegend unter Titelstichwörtern und Personen suchen und dabei Namensformen verwenden, die ihnen geläufig sind. Ein großer Teil der Benutzer weiß der Umfrage zufolge nicht, wie man den Band eines mehrbändigen Werkes sucht, und fast die Hälfte aller Befragten sucht nach Aufsätzen von Sammelwerken. Benutzer unterscheiden überwiegend bei ihrer Suche nicht, ob sie in einem deutschen oder einem ausländischen Katalog recherchieren. Um zu einheitlichen Suchergebnissen bei der Suche in deutschen und ausländischen Katalogen zu gelangen, sollte eine Annäherung der Standards angestrebt werden.
    Type
    a
  16. Nichols introduces MARCit (1998) 0.00 
    0.002311782 = product of:
  0.01155891 = sum of:
    0.01155891 = weight(_text_:a in 1438) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01155891 = score(doc=1438,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 1438, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1438)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Reports the release of MARCit, a software package that enables the cataloguing of Internet resources into MARC format bibliographic records
    Type
    a
  17. Eliot, J.: MARC and OPAC systems : discussion document (1994) 0.00 
    0.0021795689 = product of:
  0.010897844 = sum of:
    0.010897844 = weight(_text_:a in 10) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010897844 = score(doc=10,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 10, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=10)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    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
    Type
    a
  18. Parent, I.: IFLA study on functional requirements for bibliographic records : an Anglo-American perspective (1995) 0.00 
    0.0021795689 = product of:
  0.010897844 = sum of:
    0.010897844 = weight(_text_:a in 3080) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010897844 = score(doc=3080,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 3080, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3080)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Presents a view on the work of the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records Study Group on behalf of the Anglo-American cataloguing tradition. The study is examining the fundamental aspects of record design using the entity-attribute-relationship model to link data elements to the function that a user can perform while accessing a bibliographic record. The data and functions are being linked by UNIMARC fields
    Type
    a
  19. ¬The core bibliographic record for music and sound recordings (1998) 0.00 
    0.0021795689 = product of:
  0.010897844 = sum of:
    0.010897844 = weight(_text_:a in 3801) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010897844 = score(doc=3801,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 3801, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3801)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Describes the background to the creation of a core bibliographic record for music and sound recordings, provides a definition of a core bibliographic record and presents the core record for printed and manuscript music and the core record for sound recordings which were prepared by the International Association of Music Libraries, Archives and Documentation Centres Working Group in Perugia, 1-6 Sep 1996
    Type
    a
  20. Chandrakar, R.: Mapping CCF to MARC21 : an experimental approach (2001) 0.00 
    0.002002062 = product of:
  0.0100103095 = sum of:
    0.0100103095 = weight(_text_:a in 5437) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0100103095 = score(doc=5437,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.18723148 = fieldWeight in 5437, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5437)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    The purpose of this article is to raise and address a number of issues pertaining to the conversion of Common Communication Format (CCF) into MARC21. In this era of global resource sharing, exchange of bibliographic records from one system to another is imperative in today's library communities. Instead of using a single standard to create machine-readable catalogue records, more than 20 standards have emerged and are being used by different institutions. Because of these variations in standards, sharing of resources and transfer of data from one system to another among the institutions locally and globally has become a significant problem. Addressing this problem requires keeping in mind that countries such as India and others in southeast Asia are using the CCF as a standard for creating bibliographic cataloguing records. This paper describes a way to map the bibliographic catalogue records from CCF to MARC21, although 100% mapping is not possible. In addition, the paper describes an experimental approach that enumerates problems that may occur during the mapping of records/exchanging of records and how these problems can be overcome.
    Type
    a

Authors

Years

Languages

  • d 49
  • e 48
  • f 2
  • sp 1
  • More… Less…

Themes